Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631793)

No. Dane made some ridiculous prediction. Hootie predicted he'd re-sign for 5/120. Hootie was correct about the fact that he re-signed and correct about the $ per year. Wilson got the exact same deal, only it was for 4 years instead of 5...therefore Dane tried to declare victory even though he keeps making predictions about young star QBs being traded or not resigned.

It makes no sense. Hootie was really, really close. Dane was laughably wrong...again.

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0 (Post 11631782)

because, if you break it down, 110/5 = 22. 88/4 = 22.

somehow though, since I was so close to being right, Dane decided he was going to add in Russell's current final year on his rookie deal to make it look like he was making Alex Smith money instead of Aaron Rodgers money while ignoring the fact both Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers signed extensions on their 2nd deals as well (Rodgers 5 year extension was 5/110/63 but added on to his existing 2 year contract turning his 22 in new money to around 17.5 if you add the 2 existing years like he wanted to do with Russell)

So he was arguing Wilson using the last year of his rookie deal while comparing it to NEW MONEY ONLY on Rodgers/Smith extensions while ignoring the extension part of their deals.

It was totally ridiculous ... and somehow people are still trying to call me the moron.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631793)

No. Dane made some ridiculous prediction. Hootie predicted he'd re-sign for 5/120. Hootie was correct about the fact that he re-signed and correct about the $ per year. Wilson got the exact same deal, only it was for 4 years instead of 5...therefore Dane tried to declare victory even though he keeps making predictions about young star QBs being traded or not resigned.

It makes no sense. Hootie was really, really close. Dane was laughably wrong...again.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11631817)

White Knighting Hootie?

LMAO

That's the funniest shit I've ever seen.

Furthermore, I made ZERO predictions about Russell Wilson's contract, ****tard.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631826)

I still don't think they even realize what they're doing. Nobody is dumb enough to knowingly only count the additional money and years to the Rodgers extension while including the final year of Wilson's rookie contract when comparing the deals, are they?

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11631844)

One more thing, you butt****ing little punk, Russell Wilson has a 5 year contract with the Seattle Seahawks with a maximum value of $87.5 million dollars.

He does not have a five year deal worth $110 million dollars, yet your miniscule brain can't cope with that fact.

Now, go **** yourself with your wife's biggest dildo, Dildo.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631847)

Are you going to call JA and Cochise white knights for taking your side?

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631857)

So when Rodgers got his extension, it was really a 7 year contract because he still had 2 years left on the prior deal, right?

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11631870)

Who gives a flying **** if it's an extension? The difference between an "extension" and "new" contract is the simple fact that the contract didn't expire.

The term "extension" is absolutely irrelevant, especially with the introduction of a singing bonus and guarantees.

Both parties came to an agreement to trash the existing agreement and create a new one. "Extension" is meaningless.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11631870)

Who gives a flying **** if it's an extension? The difference between an "extension" and "new" contract is the simple fact that the contract didn't expire.

The term "extension" is absolutely irrelevant, especially with the introduction of a singing bonus and guarantees.

Both parties came to an agreement to trash the existing agreement and create a new one. "Extension" is meaningless.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11631870)

Who gives a flying **** if it's an extension? The difference between an "extension" and "new" contract is the simple fact that the contract didn't expire.

The term "extension" is absolutely irrelevant, especially with the introduction of a singing bonus and guarantees.

Both parties came to an agreement to trash the existing agreement and create a new one. "Extension" is meaningless.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 11631877)

You didn't answer the question.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11631885)

So answer the question about Rodgers. He did the same thing.