Two 1st round picks for Russell Wilson in '16 and '17 or '17 and '18

[Discuss Thrower]

Clayton on show seems to hint that SEA would be open to non-exclusive Tag for RW in 2016- seems surprising but SEA will study all avenues

— DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) June 20, 2015

Do you sign the offer sheet if the Seahawks non-exclusively tag Russell Wilson?

Pole cumming.

[O.city]

I like the pay for performance type stuff rain man.

It'll never happen, but I like it.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by -King-

Boss is the most dramatic guy I've ever came across but there are a few things here you must consider:

1) The Patriots cheat. This has been proven now. Twice.

2) How's it going to look in 5 years when Brady is a retired team employee?

I do know that rich guys don't just take less because they have a rich wife. And are we really to believe that Tom/Gisele are forever, ever, ever? I am fairly certain they both have their own prenups (I could be wrong, who knows).

But it is impossible to prove. So cheating isn't the right word, but, as Amnorix has pointed out, it is an unfair competitive advantage which sucks for the rest of the NFL.

[O.city]

Yeah, I don't get the rage for brady doing it. If it's such an advantage,other teams should tell their qbs to do it or get bent.

[Hootie]

pay for performance would never work

Marshawn Lynch would punch coaches for taking TD's away from him on the 1

receivers would constantly cry about not getting enough balls

rush backers would never agree to drop back into coverage

it would be a total shit show

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I'd really like to see a standard contract for the entire league that pays players a league minimum and then has performance clauses all over the place. I'd like the NFL's winningest teams to be the ones that know the most about football rather than the ones that do the most creative accounting.

Side note:

1. who has won the most Super Bowls in the free agency/salary cap era by a mile? Bill Belichick.

2. who has an ECONOMICS degree from college? Bill Belichick.

Unrelated? Nope, they sure aren't. When the 4-3 was all the rage in the early 2000s, Belichick built a 3-4 defense. Law of supply and demand. Those big DLs and two-gappers? Nobody else really wanted them.

Now, the league is trending much more to 3-4, and what do we see? Patriots are heading toward 4-3. Where the league has more demand and less supply, the Patriots move away from that and go to where he can get more bang for his buck using a different system to win.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by O.city

Yeah, I don't get the rage for brady doing it. If it's such an advantage,other teams should tell their qbs to do it or get bent.

"Hey Andrew, you're going to take $8M a year, or get bent!"

...

Pretty sure FRANCHISE QB'S have all of the leverage, not the organization.

"Hey Andrew, get bent!"

31 other teams offer him 100% guaranteed $150M contract within 5 minutes

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Side note:

1. who has won the most Super Bowls in the free agency/salary cap era by a mile? Bill Belichick.

2. who has an ECONOMICS degree from college? Bill Belichick.

Unrelated? Nope, they sure aren't. When the 4-3 was all the rage in the early 2000s, Belichick built a 3-4 defense. Law of supply and demand. Those big DLs and two-gappers? Nobody else really wanted them.

Now, the league is trending much more to 3-4, and what do we see? Patriots are heading toward 4-3. Where the league has more demand and less supply, the Patriots move away from that and go to where he can get more bang for his buck using a different system to win.

3. Who has been busted for two major cheating scandals within the last decade?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

3. Who has been busted for two major cheating scandals within the last decade?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by O.city

I like the pay for performance type stuff rain man.

It'll never happen, but I like it.

The other advantage of this system, which the league would really like, is that it'll force declining players out the door sooner. If you keep having to pay more and more for a Charles Woodson or a Jerry Rice or a Bruce Smith, with no option to lower his cost, eventually he'll get forced out of the league and will be less likely to sue for medical reasons later.

One potential challenge to this is whether it would be age discrimination, but I'll let the courts decide that. The fact that there's an increasing vet minimum now may mean that it's okay.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

"Hey Andrew, you're going to take $8M a year, or get bent!"

...

Pretty sure FRANCHISE QB'S have all of the leverage, not the organization.

"Hey Andrew, get bent!"

31 other teams offer him 100% guaranteed $150M contract within 5 minutes

Sure, but then go be smart and spend the money to build a better team.

QBs just don't s3em to be the force multipliers they once were.

They do have these franchises over a barrel because therr are a drought of that type of player around, but the franchise doesn't have to pay it either.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by -King-

Comedy. Wilson had 20 less touchdowns than Luck and 18 less than Rodgers. He had 1,200 yards less than Luck and 900 less than Rodgers.





But yeah, they're totally in the same tier. Totally.

Wilson had 200 less attempts.

This is a Jamaal Charles vs Adrian Peterson/Marshawn Lynch/Lesean McCoy argument here. Jamaal almost always has less yards than those guys, sometimes by a wide margin. He's probably the best out of the group, though (aside from AP).

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

pay for performance would never work

Marshawn Lynch would punch coaches for taking TD's away from him on the 1

receivers would constantly cry about not getting enough balls

rush backers would never agree to drop back into coverage

it would be a total shit show

Then I guess they can go put their communications degrees to work and find another career.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

pay for performance would never work

Marshawn Lynch would punch coaches for taking TD's away from him on the 1

receivers would constantly cry about not getting enough balls

rush backers would never agree to drop back into coverage

it would be a total shit show

Never thought of it this way.

Thanks for that insight. Truly, no bullshit.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by O.city

Sure, but then go be smart and spend the money to build a better team.

QBs just don't s3em to be the force multipliers they once were.

They do have these franchises over a barrel because therr are a drought of that type of player around, but the franchise doesn't have to pay it either.

you have got to explain to me why you keep using 3's instead of e's

it's driving me insane

[Hootie]

pay for performance by team wins would be something that might work ok ... but then you'd have players refusing to play for the Browns and Chiefs and it would turn into the NBA where you'd have about 10 super teams and 22 shitty teams

pay for individual performance would ruin the league ... I think you'd see more fights between the same team on the field than guys fighting their opponents

hell, that would actually be kind of entertaining. Let's do it!