It matters in the context of this discussion.

**** off, twat.

I guess Mike Florio and the CBS Sports writer is doing the same.

:rolleyes:

Everyone knows that Hootie is a dumbass but thanks for clearing up the fact that you are, too.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-31-7-million/

For Wilson, he swapped a $1.542 million base salary for 2015 and the possibility of getting a lot more later for a fairly large bird in the hand now. Whether it’s viewed as $21.9 million per year in new money or $17.8 million per year in total value, it’s a lot more than Wilson has made in three NFL seasons. And it was the smart and prudent choice to make.

so when you said he was making Alex Smith money, not Aaron Rodgers money ... what did you mean?

because Alex Smith signed a 4 year, $68M extension that was tacked on to his existing deal. As did Aaron Rodgers.

So you were dead wrong. You do realize that, right? Or are you too stubborn to admit it? Looking forward to your response.

It absolutely does not.

Russell Wilson agreed to a five year deal with a maximum value of $87.5 million per year. What he would have made under his rookie contract is irrelevant, as both parties have a new agreement in place.

What's Alex Smith's yearly average? What's Russell Wilson's yearly average? What's Aaron Rodger' yearly average?

Wrong.

LMAO

No, it does matter.

You keep posting the same disingenuous bullshit.

Absolutely. The only way Dane can declare victory is to pretend that we were talking about apples for Wilson and oranges for Rodgers. Not a single person on this board has EVER talked about an extension in any context other than what gets added to the deal...never.

It's like saying you paid $3 a gallon to fill your tank, and then Dane pretends you meant that, because the 2 gallons left in your tank only cost you $2.50 a gallon that you clearly meant that the current gas price is $3.25 and that you factored in last week's purchase to come up with some bizarre average.

Alex Smith: Signed a five-year, $76 million contract. The deal contains $45 million guaranteed. (15.2)

Russell Wilson: Signed a five-year, $89.142 million contract. The deal contains $60 million guaranteed, including a $31 million signing bonus. (17.82)

Aaron Rodgers: Signed a seven-year, $130.75 million contract. The deal contains $54 million guaranteed -- $35 million signing bonus and each of Rodgers' 2014 and 2015 roster bonuses. (18.67)

Tony Romo: Signed a seven-year, $119.5 million contract. The deal contains $55 million guaranteed, including a $25 million signing bonus. (17.07)


Yep Dane. Alex Smith money.

Apparently, you've never signed a contract before, which based on this discussion, isn't surprising.

And who gives a **** what a drunken racist and a tiny little shit like yourself believe is the proper nomenclature for discussing the details of a contract?

But go ahead and ignore what Mike Florio and CBS Sports has written because it's pretty clear that you are failing to acknowledge that Russell Wilson is currently signed to a five year deal worth a maximum value of $87.5 million.

This is like pulling teeth.

Go to overthecap or spotrac and they don't even acknowledge the original contract details. It's all about the new money.

Aaron Rodgers, using Dane's logic, makes $850,000 more per year than Russell Wilson.

Yep.

Alex Smith money.

...and the Falcons let Matt Ryan walk in free agency, right?

Hi Dane.

LMAO

**** you and the milk carton you rode in on.

Matt Ryan: Signed a six-year, $103.75 million contract. The deal contains $59 million guaranteed, including a $28 million signing bonus. (17.3)

Keep the hits on coming, Mr. McCloud.

Dane tries so hard to be smart, gets bitch slapped, and resorts to name calling. It's what he does best.

Hey ****ball.

I never mentioned Rodgers or Romo, so I'm not sure why you're adding them.

When I said "Alex Smith money", I was talking yearly average and you're right, Wilson's earning more than $2 million more per year, which is relevant.

So I stand corrected by that comparison.

And you stand on the sidelines, waving your scrawny little arms screaming "Hey, look at me! Look at me!".

Punk.

he has been parading around the Brady/Patriots thread with some made up Peter King bullshit about only 2 balls being under the minimum threshold and them both being only .4 PSI below

I looked all over for this article ... and it's nowhere. Literally doesn't exist. He is nuts.

He lives in his own reality.

I'm not on the sidelines. I'm right here...laughing in your face about the stupid shit you say while hootie owns you over and over.

Hootie owns nothing

This is to what I was referring:


“Officials used two gauges at halftime of the AFC Championship Game to measure the air pressure in 11 New England footballs and four Indianapolis footballs. On page 113 of the Wells report, after a description of the scientific Ideal Gas Law (eyes glaze over), Wells says the Patriots footballs should have measured between 11.32 psi and 11.52 psi. The average of one gauge for the 11 balls was 11.49 psi, on the upper range of what the balls should measure. The average of the other gauge was 11.11 psi, clearly lower than what the balls should have measured. Average all 22 readings, and you get 11.30 … two-one-hundredths lower what the Ideal Gas Law would have allowed for balls that started the day at 12.5 psi. You’re going to suspend someone—never mind a franchise quarterback, never mind without a smoking gun—for an air-pressure measurement of 11.30 when the allowable measurement would have been 11.32?”

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/05/1...ey-tunes-land/

------------

There you go. It was from May, so my memory was slightly faulty. It wasn't .4 PSI, it was .02 PSI.

how in the **** do you conclude 11.3 is only .02 PSI below 12.5?

Hamas has already put to rest that ridiculous notion of how they use the Ideal Gas Law. So has Magic Hef. Hamas did the math and stated that, assuming the footballs were exactly at 12.5 PSI before the game ... at worst, they'd read 12.1.

22 readings averaged out at 11.3.

That's a pound of air.

Brady cheated. It's pretty obvious to anyone with common sense. Which, you know, I understand why it wouldn't be obvious to you.

Per Hamas: (You know, a MENSA certified genius)

Sorry Dane. Once again you're arguing on the wrong side. But hey, you're DaneMcCloud, and you make music!

He's going to be a Seahawk for life probably. Win 3 or 4 Super Bowls I bet. Future HOFer.

I just saw Dane's post calling me tiny and a drunken racist. Is there a gene that makes him predisposed to being wrong about everything he says?

Sounds like a good team for you to go be a fan of.

He was actually calling me a drunken racist, which, does have merit.

Except wilsons guarantee is only 31.7 million, no matter what you have read

Ok. I guess it's better to just be tiny than to be tiny and drunken and racist.

LMAO

Ok man. You're right. When the Hawks cut Russell Wilson after this season due to his hooker/drug problem, they probably won't be on the hook for that $29M guaranteed for injury only.

yeah I think you were the tiny one, and I was the drunken racist

but I could have misinterpreted that like I have with Russell making Alex Smith money

WWait hootie, I thought no one uses that last year when discussion extensions yet this article you are commenting about days he had signed a six year extension but all told he has a 7 year deal...

in English?

Maybe you're racist, I'm tiny, and JA's drunken?

Exactly

Except, again, Wilson only got 31.7 fully guaranteed. Not 60

Ok so ...

Rodgers, on average, makes $850,000 more per year than Russell Wilson. What exactly are we arguing at this point?

That I'm a moron for not including his final year on his contract into my 5/110/80 prediction? We're still on that? Or that Wilson makes Alex Smith money since you only count extension as part of the contract for Wilson and not for Smith/Rodgers? Or? I'm just thoroughly confused.

You are right. And he's under contract for five years and 89. Something million on spotrac

This is like "Tom didn't cheat / the deflator just wanted to lose weight" level of stupid.

Would you like me to explain why, or ... ?

Your choice.

Nobody is disputing this. It's pretty widely understood that, when talking about what Wilson was going to get, the focus was in new money and additional years beyond the original contract. People who try to win arguments on message boards by being pedantic are terrible posters.

I've never once brought up anyone else's contract, not once. Well except to point out that the article you posted referred to romos six year extension being a seven year deal, they redid the last year of his old deal, which is something you are claiming never happens

You're arguing over bookkeeping.

They did not redo the last year of his old deal. Anything else, skippy?

Rename the Lounge "Hootie vs. Dane Lounge".


Their arguments have totaled at least 90% of the posts the last 3-4 days.

And someone parading around for days screaming they were right, after screaming for months first that they would be right, and they actually predicted the deal would be for 5 years 110 million with 80 guaranteed.

The deal is for 4 years 88 million with 31.7 guaranteed.

I can't believe people are saying he was spot on, especially with all the shit weatherman took over being 2.5 million off on Houston s deal

Let's assume Wilson doesn't get injured and that $29M in injury guarantees doesn't come into play.

What are the odds of the Hawks cutting Russell Wilson before 2019? Are they less than 0.5%? I think they are.

But that's fine, Jason, keep thinking he has 31.7M guaranteed and that's it LMAO

actually, you are wrong

the deal is 1 year, 31.7M guaranteed if that's the way you're looking at it

It's still a seven year deal, just like wilsons is a five

Why does a portion of his signing bonus count against the cap this year?
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-s...ussell-wilson/

That's the silliest thing I've ever heard.




It's a five year deal with 31.7 guaranteed no where close to eighty, and you sure were hung up on the that 60 million guaranteed this morning...

omg LMAO

no, dipshit ...

it's a 1 year, 31.7M guaranteed deal if that's how you're looking at it

I promise

Because they re did his final year of the old contract and added years.


It's a five year deal.

then, if he makes the team !!!! in 2016, it's suddenly a 2 year, 43.5M deal guaranteed!

Boy I bet he hopes he makes the squad in 2016

No. I only love to hate my Chiefs. No other team will do.

Yeah and you would still be wrong

Everyone in this thread should kill themselves, just for a few days.

Kinda what I was thinking, but I know very little about this shit.

Guess what?



So are you.

I'll follow your lead... Promise

DEAL.

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/h...indow_Fall.gif

uhm no, I wouldn't

if the Hawks cut him after the season, he'd have played 1 season, and made $31.7M

that's fact

100% fact

how in the **** can you argue this?

Seriously. The only way this deal is $31.7M guaranteed is if the Hawks cut Russell immediately after this season.

Let's try and think of how Russell might get cut after this season:

#1: He rapes a small child.

Welp, that's the list!

Reasons Russell may be cut after the 2016 season:

1. Aforementioned child rape
2. God tells him to start throwing left handed and he doesn't immediately excel

He is complexly overrated. I know he's young and may someday live up to his hype but as of now he's average at best.

I have seen more pictures of him with Future's kid than I have with Future

If he's overrated then Luck is as well

No

Things might get awkward for hootie when Luck signs for the biggest contract in NFL history and legitimately makes $60M fully guaranteed instead of 31.
Posted via Mobile Device

I believe the Colts have an option to pick up for Luck on the 2016 season, which I'm sure they'll take. If he signs an extension then $75 mil guaranteed will probably be the norm.

Yeah they already picked up the option. Im thinking they start working on a deal at the end of this season and unlike Wilson, I don't think they'll have any qualms about making him the highest paid player ever.

But $31 million is the same as $80 million.

Hootie and Saul told me so.

I don't think Wilson is overrated, but your comment is hilarious. LOL

Luck carries the Colts. Period.

You cannot say that about Wilson.

Better delete this post before Hootie sees it and unleashes hell on you.

Most people think Russell Wilson is an above average QB. Whereas most people think Andrew Luck is Jesus reincarnate on the gridiron.

In truth, they're both probably around the 6-8 range.

But if anyone is ready to take that crown when Manning/Brady retires, it's Luck. Dude just threw for 40TDs last year. And while he turns the ball over a bit too much sometimes, a 40 TD to 16 INT ratio is ****ing excellent.

And yes, his playoff performances have been underwhelming at times. But then again, he doesn't have the luxury of throwing 4 INTs in a game and still having a chance to win. He had a horrible game (2 INTs and under 150 yards) against the Patriots and the Colts defense allowed 45 points. Wilson has a horrible game (4 INTs and 200 yards) and the Seahawks defense only allows 22 points and the goddamn punter throws a touchdown.

One of the two is clearly more important to his team and his teams success is derived almost entirely from him.

We've had this argument too many times to jump on the carousel again... I just like to point out that Wilson doesn't get as much credit as he deserves while Luck generally tends to be praised undeservedly.

Luck is asked to do more while Wilson actually does more with less.

It's no wonder that a dip**** with a Napoleon complex like "Saul Good", which is one of the dumbest and obvious user names in the history of the internets, would White Knight Hootie, King of the Dumbshits.

Both morons were wrong about everything, as was that geriatric, miniature loudmouth, Milkman.