Clowney: At What Price?

Clowney: At What Cost: Clowney?

$15/16 Mill
0
No votes
$17/18 Mill
2
15%
$19/20 Mill
3
23%
$20/21 Mill
1
8%
$22/23 Mill
6
46%
Over $23 Mill
1
8%
 
Total votes: 13

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 11271
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:09 pm

auroraave wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:52 pm
This is seriously your response? For years you have ben lamenting ad nauseum about how bad Schneider is, the horror of taking Penny, the blasphemy of not taking Ramczyk, and now because he isn't UNDERPAYING players? An somehow MY feelings are hurt? lol! Okay.
And you accused him of exaggerating? :lol:

By the way, Schneider's drafts have been mediocre at best since Scot McCloughan left town. A couple of them have been downright awful.

ThePro
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 2:12 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by ThePro » Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:51 pm

Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:09 pm
auroraave wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:52 pm
This is seriously your response? For years you have ben lamenting ad nauseum about how bad Schneider is, the horror of taking Penny, the blasphemy of not taking Ramczyk, and now because he isn't UNDERPAYING players? An somehow MY feelings are hurt? lol! Okay.
And you accused him of exaggerating? :lol:

By the way, Schneider's drafts have been mediocre at best since Scot McCloughan left town. A couple of them have been downright awful.
Scott McCloughan? Please :roll:

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13263
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Donn Beach » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:05 am

some stuff on how they go about contracts
WINNERS
John Schneider/Pete Carroll
The Seahawks just spent an unholy amount on their quarterback, but it was a necessary line item in the budget moving forward. I'll bet donuts to dollars that Schneider makes some sort of quasi-sarcastic remark -- with a wry grin to boot -- when asked if he ever questioned paying Wilson top of the market money over the four years of this extension. Something along the lines of "Well I thought about going out to the quarterback tree in my back yard and grabbing a new one instead."

If you want to keep a franchise quarterback on your roster, $30 million-plus is just the cost of doing business. Losing Wilson would be a next-level nightmare: Seahawks fans would turn on the front office if they had decided to trade Wilson to, oooooooooh I don't know, the Giants. And Carroll isn't a spring chicken either; there have been (obviously unfounded) rumors of him retiring for a few years now and coaching without Wilson would crank up the difficulty level of making a Super Bowl run way past All-Madden.

The Seahawks got this deal done without having to break from their normal structure of contracts, too, which is a huge win for the organization. That's the compromise part of this -- Russell, like Aaron Rodgers before him, didn't shift the paradigm for quarterbacks doing business, he just got more money than anyone else.
the Wagner extension
Wagner signing a three-year extension as opposed to a longer-term deal shouldn't come as a surprise. The Seahawks have become very comfortable in giving players three-year extensions, especially in bigger deals. For example, the contracts offensive tackle Duane Brown and wide receiver Tyler Lockett signed last year at the beginning of training camp were three-year extensions. Center Justin Britt and safety Kam Chancellor also accepted three-year extensions in 2017.

Wagner's extension conforms to Seattle's preferred contract structure. The Seahawks prefer lucrative veteran contracts signed to be structured where the guaranteed money consists of base salary guarantees and a signing bonus. Base salary guarantees after the first contract year are for injury only initially at signing but typically become fully guaranteed either on the fifth day of the waiver period in each specific year or five days after the start of the waiver period. The waiver period always begins the day after the Super Bowl.

Quarterback Russell Wilson, who became the NFL's highest-paid player in April at $35 million per year, was unable to get the Seahawks to deviate from this structure. The second year of Wilson's contract isn't fully guaranteed at signing, whereas the second year in most of the NFL's other big contracts is. The Seahawks were never going to give something structurally to Wagner that wasn't done for Wilson.

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Michael K. » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:13 am

Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:05 am
some stuff on how they go about contracts
WINNERS
John Schneider/Pete Carroll
The Seahawks just spent an unholy amount on their quarterback, but it was a necessary line item in the budget moving forward. I'll bet donuts to dollars that Schneider makes some sort of quasi-sarcastic remark -- with a wry grin to boot -- when asked if he ever questioned paying Wilson top of the market money over the four years of this extension. Something along the lines of "Well I thought about going out to the quarterback tree in my back yard and grabbing a new one instead."

If you want to keep a franchise quarterback on your roster, $30 million-plus is just the cost of doing business. Losing Wilson would be a next-level nightmare: Seahawks fans would turn on the front office if they had decided to trade Wilson to, oooooooooh I don't know, the Giants. And Carroll isn't a spring chicken either; there have been (obviously unfounded) rumors of him retiring for a few years now and coaching without Wilson would crank up the difficulty level of making a Super Bowl run way past All-Madden.

The Seahawks got this deal done without having to break from their normal structure of contracts, too, which is a huge win for the organization. That's the compromise part of this -- Russell, like Aaron Rodgers before him, didn't shift the paradigm for quarterbacks doing business, he just got more money than anyone else.
the Wagner extension
Wagner signing a three-year extension as opposed to a longer-term deal shouldn't come as a surprise. The Seahawks have become very comfortable in giving players three-year extensions, especially in bigger deals. For example, the contracts offensive tackle Duane Brown and wide receiver Tyler Lockett signed last year at the beginning of training camp were three-year extensions. Center Justin Britt and safety Kam Chancellor also accepted three-year extensions in 2017.

Wagner's extension conforms to Seattle's preferred contract structure. The Seahawks prefer lucrative veteran contracts signed to be structured where the guaranteed money consists of base salary guarantees and a signing bonus. Base salary guarantees after the first contract year are for injury only initially at signing but typically become fully guaranteed either on the fifth day of the waiver period in each specific year or five days after the start of the waiver period. The waiver period always begins the day after the Super Bowl.

Quarterback Russell Wilson, who became the NFL's highest-paid player in April at $35 million per year, was unable to get the Seahawks to deviate from this structure. The second year of Wilson's contract isn't fully guaranteed at signing, whereas the second year in most of the NFL's other big contracts is. The Seahawks were never going to give something structurally to Wagner that wasn't done for Wilson.
So, Russell got more money than anyone else, and like Aaron Rodgers before him, didn't change the way NFL teams do contracts. But I am foolish to point out that Clowney won't sign here because JS is a magic man. JS will have nothing to do with Clowney's decision. How the contract effects the team will be about JS working his magic.

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13263
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Donn Beach » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:21 am

who said you were foolish?...that is the reason i said i was a bit pessimistic of his signing here

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13263
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Donn Beach » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am

I could add, that doesn't mean JS won't come up with an alternate plan...That is the "magic", posters here put everything on getting Clowney resigned, but i doubt JS looks at it that way. That would be my point, its not that JS is great, he will get him signed, its that JS is great, he will field a competitive team

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Michael K. » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am

Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:21 am
who said you were foolish?...that is the reason i said i was a bit pessimistic of his signing here
Read a few of comments prior.

User avatar
Donn Beach
Posts: 13263
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Donn Beach » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:30 am

Michael K. wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am
Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:21 am
who said you were foolish?...that is the reason i said i was a bit pessimistic of his signing here
Read a few of comments prior.
ok, it wasn't me, think its going to be tough, and a lot of that probably has to do with them not being able to franchise him. It could be that he really does want to stay here, think it would have to turn on that. Not that he would take less money, but would be willing to sign JS's contract.

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Michael K. » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:44 am

Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am
I could add, that doesn't mean JS won't come up with an alternate plan...That is the "magic", posters here put everything on getting Clowney resigned, but i doubt JS looks at it that way. That would be my point, its not that JS is great, he will get him signed, its that JS is great, he will field a competitive team
I think when it comes to FA signings and re-signings he hits far more than he doesn't. Honestly, I am trying to think, and I know there was SOME criticism about the Bennett and Sherman extensions towards the end, but they weren't exactly hurting us on the field there at the end. ET was performing at a high level and other than a few injuries, so was Kam. Those extensions seemed to be the right moves. He has signed some inexpensive guys that didn't pan out, but who hasn't...and it hasn't hurt the cap. Gordon was a low risk high reward guy and so was Ziggy. I usually have no beef. I know a few years back we signed an OT and moved him to Guard, and passed on an actual Guard that we then lost. Joeckle was the guy we signed, can't remember the guy we passed on. But I usually have no complaints here.

I complain about some of what they do in the early rounds of the draft, but more nitpicking than anything. Everyone knows I didn't like taking a Running Back in the 1st round, but as late as we draft it is damn near the second round anyway. I have read some interesting articles about this trading down, about how if you pick in the lower 15 or so of the first round you may be better off, statistically speaking, in loading up on 2nd and 3rd rounders instead. Yes, I have wondered about passing on Ramcyk, Cam Robinson and Terron Armstead and Keenan Allen....but I was also upset they passed on the Bama LB that went to SF and ended up getting booted out of the league!

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Clowney: At What Price?

Post by Michael K. » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:46 am

Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:30 am
Michael K. wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:26 am
Donn Beach wrote:
Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:21 am
who said you were foolish?...that is the reason i said i was a bit pessimistic of his signing here
Read a few of comments prior.
ok, it wasn't me, think its going to be tough, and a lot of that probably has to do with them not being able to franchise him. It could be that he really does want to stay here, think it would have to turn on that. Not that he would take less money, but would be willing to sign JS's contract.
Yeah, not having the Franchise Tag option sucks, but it may also be the only reason he agreed to play for us. He was holding out in Texas right? It would be nice if it comes down to him making a choice and the Hawks win out because they did that for him. I don't know if it will really sway his decision if the money is a lot bigger somewhere else though.

Post Reply