Oh my god...Seahawks offer to Burleson 7yrs 49mil 5.25 S.B.

[ratbert_rizzo]

Wow, this Hutchinson thing is making restricted free agency absolutely worthless. Now every restricted free agent will have so many poison pills that nobody will ever be able to match it. A loophole already found in the collective bargaining agreement.

[SteelerSkins]

i refuse to believe this

[BlueTalon]

Wow, this Hutchinson thing is making restricted free agency absolutely worthless. Now every restricted free agent will have so many poison pills that nobody will ever be able to match it. A loophole already found in the collective bargaining agreement.

Made, past tense.

[TaylorPickSix]

wow and they say we overpayed?

stoopid.

[BlueTalon]

wow and they say we overpayed?

stoopid.

Do you even understand what's going on? The Seahawks will not be paying Burleson $7M per year. It's a contract with a bit over $5M guaranteed, and the bulk of the bucks at the back end of the contract. So in reality it's a legitimate 4 year contract that will either be reworked or end with Burleson getting cut before the big bucks kick in.

It was structured as a 7 year $49M contract to make a point and take a little poke at the Vikes.

[spm]

Well that is certainly the funniest signing I've ever heard about. Minnesota deserves it in my opinion for starting this junk.

[ratbert_rizzo]

Restriced Free Agency will now just be a formality with no real purpose. Now you can just put a crazy poison pill in any contract. I mean how about making the deal guaranteed if he wears a burgundy helmet for over 7 games in any season in the contract or something.

[jrockster21]

Wow, this Hutchinson thing is making restricted free agency absolutely worthless. Now every restricted free agent will have so many poison pills that nobody will ever be able to match it. A loophole already found in the collective bargaining agreement.

The "poison pill" in contracts has been around, this is not some new development of the new CBA. This is old; we used it to take Lav Coles from the Jets, and the Iggles FO constantly uses them (you know, because they don't pay people real money).

[Westbrook36]

The "poison pill" in contracts has been around, this is not some new development of the new CBA. This is old; we used it to take Lav Coles from the Jets, and the Iggles FO constantly uses them (you know, because they don't pay people real money).

HAHAHAHA! Name the last time the Eagles used a poison pill contract to take a player from another team! Do it! NAME one used during the Andy Reid era!!!!

You lose more credibility by the day! :laugh:

[jrockster21]

HAHAHAHA! Name the last time the Eagles used a poison pill contract to take a player from another team! Do it! NAME one used during the Andy Reid era!!!!

You lose more credibility by the day! :laugh:

WB -- why are you trying to make me look bad, even when you know I am right?

From a source you yourself posted:

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=114&p=2&c=502993&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fseahawks.scout.com%2f2%2f502993.html

According to a source familiar with the situation, the Eagles are looking at designing a contract which will make it hard for Seattle to match. The Eagles have one of the best capologists in Joe Banner who put together a contract for then free agent DE Jevon Kearse a few years ago that made it very difficult for the Tennessee Titans to match.

[Westbrook36]

You said the Eagles constantly use them yet they never have! NEVER NEVER NEVER under the Andy Reid era. Please retract your incorrect statement.

[jrockster21]

You said the Eagles constantly use them yet they never have! NEVER NEVER NEVER under the Andy Reid era. Please retract your incorrect statement.

I just posted an example of them using one, and you say NEVER NEVER NEVER?

EDIT: You are right, they do not "contstantly" use them. This, however, is because they rarely go after free-agents (or more specifically, free-agents who need poison pill contracts).

[bubba9497]

You said the Eagles constantly use them yet they never have! NEVER NEVER NEVER under the Andy Reid era. Please retract your incorrect statement.

NEVER NEVER NEVER under the Andy Reid era did WHAT specifically?

you tend to use vague terms to try wiggle out of being wrong, when caught.

[McMetal]

Another reason to hate the Seahags...this is utterly bush league.

This is worse than the Jets screwing us over in that robbery of a trade for Ramsey, just because they were pissed about getting the short end of the stick on the Moss deal.

Teams need to worry about filling needs and managing their finances, and that's it. Anything beyond that is just petty and vindictive. Clearly they did not need to include all these provisions in the Burleson contract to get him signed, but they did it anyway just to be spiteful. That's not the move of a class organization.

And besides, Seattle was just stupid for not tagging Hutchinson when they had the chance, and they got burned for it. They have noone to blame but themselves. These clowns do not deserve to represent the NFC anymore...weak, weak stuff.

[Inxsive]

"REVENGE IS A DISH BEST SERVED COLD!" This is too funny. Seattle looks like a little child. These poison pills go much further than the Hutch ones. The big difference between these two guys is that Minnesota gave him the lower tender because they didn’t think he was worth the bigger one, that wasn’t the motivation for Seattle’s screw up. This guy is a #2 WR at best, I bet the Vikings will be glad to take a 3rd for him. What they should do is just match the terms without the poison pills, go to an arbiter, and just drag it out. The playing 5 games in the State of Minnesota won’t hold up, the other one related to the RB’s might but that is less likely than the Hutch poison pill. I imagine what Seattle is doing is to push it to a ridiculous level in order to get it addressed in the off-season. The funny thing is that they might succeed before they can use it to get a real quality player themselves.

Lets look at these two offers this way; Seattle sends Hutch and a 3rd to Minnesota for Nate? How many of you out there would call that a win for Seattle?

[BlueTalon]

Jrockster, what the Eagles were trying to do, with the help of their capologist, was to design a contract in terms of dollar amounts that would be difficult for the Seahawks to match. That's not a poison pill (if you think it is, then you don't understand the debate). It's a perfectly legitimate thing to do.

Inxsive, your hatred of all things Seattle is porderline patholigical and psychotic, but amusing nevertheless. But the key in this case is whether Burleson will say that he wanted those clauses in the contract. If he does, they become principle clauses according to the special-needs master.

And you are an idiot if you think anyone is calling this a win for Seattle. (You might be an idiot anyway. Seattle didn't send Hutch and a third round to MN for Nate. They are two seperate transactions.)

McMetal, I doubt that Seattle is concerned with whether you think they are a class org or not.

[BlueTalon]

By the way, I did the math on the state taxes. It's going to cost him $3,846,500. By doing what he did, his $49M contract became a $45M contract. In Seattle, he'd have kept the whole $49M.

I just wonder if he knew that when he signed the offer, or if he was/will be surprised by it afterward.

[Stew]

Do you even understand what's going on? The Seahawks will not be paying Burleson $7M per year. It's a contract with a bit over $5M guaranteed, and the bulk of the bucks at the back end of the contract. So in reality it's a legitimate 4 year contract that will either be reworked or end with Burleson getting cut before the big bucks kick in.

It was structured as a 7 year $49M contract to make a point and take a little poke at the Vikes.

Thanx Blue. I seriously had questions about what was happening up until that point

Ok, nevermind. Im still clueless. :doh:

So who got the better of the deal?

[BlueTalon]

Thanx Blue. I seriously had questions about what was happening up until that point.

So who got the better of the deal?

Depends on what you mean by "deal" -- the Seahawks got the receiver they wanted for about the price they wanted (not counting the last three years of that 7/49 offer), the Vikes get a third round pick as compensation, and the Seahawks got a poke in at the NFL and the Vikes. That sounds like a win-win situation to me, unless the Vikes really wanted to keep Nate, in which case it's hard to understand why they gave him a low tender. The Seahawks got absolutely boned by the Hutch deal, so that's a win for the Vikes.

There is another interesting aspect about this transaction, according to the News-Tribune :

The Seattle Seahawks offered to trade their third-round draft choice to Minnesota for receiver Nate Burleson.

The Vikings demanded a second-round pick for the restricted free agent. That’s when things got out of hand.

So it could be that Seattle is getting a bit of an upper hand in this deal. (But it will never compare to the Hutch deal, which started it all.)

[HOF44]

Wow, this Hutchinson thing is making restricted free agency absolutely worthless. Now every restricted free agent will have so many poison pills that nobody will ever be able to match it. A loophole already found in the collective bargaining agreement.

Teams just have to realize what can happen. If Hutch had been franchised this probably would not have happened, and if it did seattle would have received 2 first round draft picks.

If minny had made the highest tender offer seattle would have had to give up a 1st round pick, and this could have been avoided. Its teams putting themselves in these positions that allow this kind of stuff to happen to them.

They have the ability to pretty much lock people up and control the situation and don't do it. Don't come crying later when you let it happen.

[Inxsive]

Inxsive, your hatred of all things Seattle is porderline patholigical and psychotic, but amusing nevertheless. But the key in this case is whether Burleson will say that he wanted those clauses in the contract. If he does, they become principle clauses according to the special-needs master.

And you are an idiot if you think anyone is calling this a win for Seattle. (You might be an idiot anyway. Seattle didn't send Hutch and a third round to MN for Nate. They are two seperate transactions.)

QUOTE]

The only thing I hate is stupidity and apparently there is a lot in Seattle. You are clueless if you think that just because the player wishes it to be in the contract it makes it a principle clause. That's not what the special master ruled. Also, what is a “SPECIAL NEEDS" master? I think you are getting confused with what was written on the side of the bus that took you to school each day! Can you read? I didn't say Seattle sent Hutch and a 3rd, I said ‘lets look at these two offer this way’. Isn't that the end result? Do you really need Nate anyway, don't you already have an erratic injury prone WR in Jackson?

[Inxsive]

By the way, I did the math on the state taxes. It's going to cost him $3,846,500. By doing what he did, his $49M contract became a $45M contract. In Seattle, he'd have kept the whole $49M.

I just wonder if he knew that when he signed the offer, or if he was/will be surprised by it afterward.

:laugh: :doh: :laugh: This is hilarious, Has anyone ever seen a fan try so hard to make himself feel better about his team screwing up? As I said the last time Talon posted this "ha ha Hutch, you would have made more money in Seattle", obviously it was more than money that made him want to leave. I would think most fans would prefer to think a great player left just for the money, not because he didn't want to be there.

[BlueTalon]

This is hilarious, Has anyone ever seen a fan try so hard to make himself feel better about his team screwing up? As I said the last time Talon posted this "ha ha Hutch, you would have made more money in Seattle", obviously it was more than money that made him want to leave. I would think most fans would prefer to think a great player left just for the money, not because he didn't want to be there.[/color]

You're pretty dim. When Jurevicious went to the Browns, he turned down a bigger offer from Seattle to do it because he wanted to return to his hometown and play for his childhood favorite team. Everybody in Seattle was disappointed, but nobody in Seattle begrudged him that choice or felt stabbed in the back because he made that decision.

And if Hutch had made comments earlier about wanting to return to the Midwest because he had established roots there in college, or anything like that, nobody would have begrudged him that decision either. Heck, even if he was just not happy in Seattle and wanted to go anywhere else, that would have been acceptable. And you hear a lot of players saying things like that for various reasons around the league -- it's not the least bit unusual. Abraham signed with the Falcons because he wanted to be in Atlanta, and he made that desire well known. Eli Manning refused to play for the Chargers. Players making their wishes known is not unusual.

What IS unusual is for a player to do what Hutch did. If you try to piece together all his and his agent's comments about staying in/leaving Seattle and accepting the Vikings' offer, you have an incoherent and contradictory mess. Part of that mess is that it was all about what was best for him and his family, meaning it's all about the money. Given that, it's interesting that he would sign a contract that would have him making almost $4M less than if he's stayed where he was. And given the fact that Hutch has never had to deal with a state income tax in his entire carreer, and given the sneaky manner in which he and his agent conducted themselves, I find it plausible that Hutch didn't know/think about the state tax issue, and that his agent specifically did not mention it to him in order to help push the deal through.

I agree with you that it was more than just money that caused him to leave. According to him, he felt slighted by the Seahawks FO. But reading what he said about it, I can only conclude that he's overly sensitive, overly vindictive, and/or has serious ego issues, because most normal people wouldn't have responded the way he responded to his situation.

And I'll say this one more time -- perhaps on the umpteenth try it will finally sink in (though I'm not holding my breath). I don't believe my team screwed up. Got it? One more time, I don't believe my team screwed up.

So if I don't believe my team screwed up, then I don't have to try to make myself feel better about my team screwing up, do I?

[Inxsive]

Given that, it's interesting that he would sign a contract that would have him making almost $4M less than if he's stayed where he was. And given the fact that Hutch has never had to deal with a state income tax in his entire carreer, and given the sneaky manner in which he and his agent conducted themselves, I find it plausible that Hutch didn't know/think about the state tax issue, and that his agent specifically did not mention it to him in order to help push the deal through.

And I'll say this one more time -- perhaps on the umpteenth try it will finally sink in (though I'm not holding my breath). I don't believe my team screwed up. Got it? One more time, I don't believe my team screwed up.

So if I don't believe my team screwed up, then I don't have to try to make myself feel better about my team screwing up, do I?

LOL!!!. I don't know which is more pathetic, not admitting that your team screwed up, or not actually thinking they did. Either way it's pretty funny!

I'll be looking forward to the follow post from you;

"The cable in Washington is way better than Minnesota"

or

"The average height of Seattle’s residence is ¾ an inch taller"

or

"The hemp products in Minnesota don't nearly compare to Washington’s"

or

"The gas tax is 3 cents cheaper in Seattle"

One thing they do have in common, neither place has ever been Superbowl Champions

[BlueTalon]

Why would you be looking for any of those posts from me? You hate Seattle, we get it.

If you had a point, I'd be happy to address it. But having to repeat things numerous times for them to finally sink in gets pretty old. I could wish you were less dense, but it's futile and not worth the energy.