Jump to content

Is Russell Wilson The Next QB To Be On The Move - Tensions Seem To Be Growing


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, berg1029 said:

I don't understand how Wilson and by extension Watson can be frustrated with not being let in on decisions that are made above their head.  They aren't the ones running the franchise, it's not their money on the line.  What qualifies them to have their input heard over the other players on the team and other personnel people that have an expertise in this sort of thing?  Since they aren't necessarily qualified to be making these decisions and aren't financing things, why should they get a say?  To me, it just seems that being unhappy about this sort of thing is really egotistical

 

When an employee is:

  • making 20-25% of the entire payroll
  • higher paid than the Head Coach and GM (combined in some cases)
  • the face of the franchise
  • the largest contributor to the success of the team, touching the ball every offensive play

Why shouldnt they get a say? Are they really not running the franchise at all when they are so responsible for the team's on-field performance?

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Vomit 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I agree. It's almost starting to feel NBA-esque to me as this has been going on in that league for years now. The problem is if you give an inch they take a mile and the players are starting to act as

I don't understand how Wilson and by extension Watson can be frustrated with not being let in on decisions that are made above their head.  They aren't the ones running the franchise, it's not their m

When an employee is: making 20-25% of the entire payroll higher paid than the Head Coach and GM (combined in some cases) the face of the franchise the largest contributor to

39 minutes ago, berg1029 said:

I don't understand how Wilson and by extension Watson can be frustrated with not being let in on decisions that are made above their head.  They aren't the ones running the franchise, it's not their money on the line.  What qualifies them to have their input heard over the other players on the team and other personnel people that have an expertise in this sort of thing?  Since they aren't necessarily qualified to be making these decisions and aren't financing things, why should they get a say?  To me, it just seems that being unhappy about this sort of thing is really egotistical

Watson is in a poorly run organization. He has not said a word of complaint until this year when a promise that clearly was important to him was broken. Watson can earn the same amount or more in a different organization that he trusts. The fact that the Texans aren't trading him just shows that his value to the team.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

When an employee is:

  • making 20-25% of the entire payroll
  • higher paid than the Head Coach and GM (combined in some cases)
  • the face of the franchise
  • the largest contributor to the success of the team, touching the ball every offensive play

Why shouldnt they get a say? Are they really not running the franchise at all when they are so responsible for the team's on-field performance?

I understand what you are saying, but at what point do you draw the line in the sand? Does the organization need to seek out their approval at every turn or over every decision? This is where the problem lies imo. You give them an inch and they will take a mile. A player has the right to sign or refuse a contract. They can get to the end of one and, if they are a high enough caliber player, position themselves to go wherever they choose. Kirk Cousins did that, not that I think Kirk is anywhere near the level of player as the aforementioned. Both Watson and Wilson signed contracts for big $$$. Now they are frustrated with their respective organizations. There are GM's, scouts, coaches, and other personnel within an organization who are in charge of building the team you sign a contract to play for. I understand the wanting to have a say, but players are players, coaches are coaches, and FO is the FO. Yes they can speak their mind, but you can't cater to one person putting on the uniform for the sake of coddling. You start letting people veer out of their lanes or have people overstepping their bounds into other areas because that person feels they know best then it's almost a certain recipe for disaster. That's just my 2. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Talented QB's like Russ are seeing the way stars like Brady and Lebron are orchestrating player signings and want to get in on some of that star power clout action. They want a voice too. 

It doesn't work like that in the NFL but players are gonna try.  Brady is an exception.  He's earned the right.  And he's also taken team friendly wages too.  Doesn't hurt that his spouse is worth like $300million at least.... a little bit easier to take less if it helps build a winning team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

When an employee is:

  • making 20-25% of the entire payroll
  • higher paid than the Head Coach and GM (combined in some cases)
  • the face of the franchise
  • the largest contributor to the success of the team, touching the ball every offensive play

Why shouldnt they get a say? Are they really not running the franchise at all when they are so responsible for the team's on-field performance?

Agree with this. The counter for management is to have a good working relationship with such a franchise QB that they don't go public with requests (as Wilson may or may not be doing here) or go all the way to total trust meltdown (i.e. Watson-Houston). 

An alternative approach is build a championship caliber team based on defense and the run game with an offense constructed such that a mid-tier (and hence, replaceable) QB can be effective, hence the QB doesn't fit the description of an employee with high leverage. This is a lot more work than the "build around a franchise QB" approach but it's an option nonetheless. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, H2o said:

I agree. It's almost starting to feel NBA-esque to me as this has been going on in that league for years now. The problem is if you give an inch they take a mile and the players are starting to act as if they are the CEO instead of an employee. 

Wilson is the CEO of Seahawks.  Have you ever seen some of the offensive talent around him? He carries that offense. 
 

players get used and abused until the team discards them when they are no longer valuable. You’d be an idiot in any walk of life not to take advantage of your leverage. Guys like Wilson, Watson, and Stafford have leverage because they are really good at the most important position in sports. It’s stupid not to take advantage of it.

 

I seriously doubt he is getting traded but they have consistently surrounded him with below average talent. Guys like Wilson and Rodgers have made their receivers and not the other way around. 

29 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

When an employee is:

  • making 20-25% of the entire payroll
  • higher paid than the Head Coach and GM (combined in some cases)
  • the face of the franchise
  • the largest contributor to the success of the team, touching the ball every offensive play

Why shouldnt they get a say? Are they really not running the franchise at all when they are so responsible for the team's on-field performance?

They should just yes sir snd thank you for paying me. Go billionaires!

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Wilson is the CEO of Seahawks.  Have you ever seen some of the offensive talent around him? He carries that offense. 
 

players get used and abused until the team discards them when they are no longer valuable. You’d be an idiot in any walk of life not to take advantage of your leverage. Guys like Wilson, Watson, and Stafford have leverage because they are really good at the most important position in sports. It’s stupid not to take advantage of it.

 

I seriously doubt he is getting traded but they have consistently surrounded him with below average talent. Guys like Wilson and Rodgers have made their receivers and not the other way around. 

They should just yes sir snd thank you for paying me. Go billionaires!

 

Splitting hairs here, and we are in agreement, but I'd call the Head Coach the CEO, and the QB the President. But love the analogy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

He could always restructure for less money so they could sign better O-linemen. ( I bet he doesn't). 

So he should lose money because the front office sucks on offensive personnel moves?

 

if you were essentially the main reason the business was successful and made a ton of money, you won’t want a say jn matters? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was interesting to see the comment on ProFootballtalk that Seattle considered a trade of Wilson for Cleveland's #1 in 2018 with the idea of then selecting Josh Allen. Not sure how serious Seattle really was? All I know is I couldn't stomach Baker Mayfield or Josh Rosen as our QB.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/07/report-seattle-has-received-calls-about-a-possible-russell-wilson-trade/

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

What does a player contract mean? 

 

Trading a player under contract is usually disadvantageous to the trading team if there is a generous signing bonus the team has to eat.  The more recent the signing, the more disadvantageous.

 

Seems to me that if teams start letting key players under contract force trades whenever they have a difference of opinion, contracts will start having little meaning to  teams.

 

The owners gotta see this.

And the players see that their contracts can get torn up in a random Tuesday in April.

 

 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

He could always restructure for less money so they could sign better O-linemen. ( I bet he doesn't). 

 

Yes restructure and move cost to future in which player sits out.  Does that make any sense for a front office? 

11 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

And the players see that their contracts can get torn up in a random Tuesday in April.

 

Yes because it was agreed to by their reps in NFLPA.  Of course their word means nothing for they try to get in court what they cannot get on bargaining table.  No way would NFL agree to players getting large signing bonuses and being able to sit out or retire and keep the money.  The NFL should look at RICO act. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

And the players see that their contracts can get torn up in a random Tuesday in April.

 

Yes and no.... if the contracts involve a signing bonus, or guaranteed money, that money is still owed by the team if the player is released.  That doesn't get torn up.

 

Which is why those details matter a lot to the players.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll use John Elway as an example here.

 

When he was coming into the league, he saw he was about to be drafted into a poorly managed franchise, and played what little cards he had to try to control his destiny. Even though it was well established that rookies "go where they are drafted" and should never question it, and just be happy they are getting a chance in the league.

 

And now he's actually a President running a franchise.

 

So when folks up-thread ask why these guys think they are qualified to participate in decision making, there you go.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There once was a 5th round QB who was passed by many teams but thru the right combination of acting lessons, cheating, spying and having referees give him calls he became a Superbowl MVP even though he did not deserve.  

 

So when folks up-thread think all QBs have same influence it is not true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

So he should lose money because the front office sucks on offensive personnel moves?

 

if you were essentially the main reason the business was successful and made a ton of money, you won’t want a say jn matters? 

True but with a large contract, he may also be setting the ceiling. 
 

More available cap = more $$ for rounding out the rest of the team. 
 

There are no perfect answers IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, H2o said:

I understand what you are saying, but at what point do you draw the line in the sand? Does the organization need to seek out their approval at every turn or over every decision? This is where the problem lies imo. You give them an inch and they will take a mile. A player has the right to sign or refuse a contract. They can get to the end of one and, if they are a high enough caliber player, position themselves to go wherever they choose. Kirk Cousins did that, not that I think Kirk is anywhere near the level of player as the aforementioned. Both Watson and Wilson signed contracts for big $$$. Now they are frustrated with their respective organizations. There are GM's, scouts, coaches, and other personnel within an organization who are in charge of building the team you sign a contract to play for. I understand the wanting to have a say, but players are players, coaches are coaches, and FO is the FO. Yes they can speak their mind, but you can't cater to one person putting on the uniform for the sake of coddling. You start letting people veer out of their lanes or have people overstepping their bounds into other areas because that person feels they know best then it's almost a certain recipe for disaster. That's just my 2. 

if "input"  was so important to these guys, they should have negotiated the scope of the role and these additional features into their newly signed, big money contracts.

 

right next to the language that would forfeit large chunks of money for "bad input" 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

He's not going anywhere. But he did get smashed a lot this year. 

I agree;  I think Seattle is in need of a timeout and a re-think as to what and how they are doing things, but the new plan is going to include Russell Wilson!  Although at 32 he's not as young as he once was.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rc2catch said:

I don’t know, I think given Carroll’s age they’d just fire him if it really came down to it. 
In this scenario I can see Wilson having more flex in the organization. 
I can’t see any scenario where he is actually moved but I’ve been shocked before. 
 

If the reports are true I bet they'd trade him in a heartbeat for the #1 pick this year and either some players or draft capital.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

San Francisco (won’t happen for obvious reasons) 

 

Indianapolis

 

New Orleans (Cap space will make it nearly impossible) 

 

Wilson has one of the best WR combos in the NFL.   Carson was going 4.8 YPC and 5 TDs but missed 4 games.

 

Rodgers has a top WR and RB (plus Williams added another 500 yards), plus M V-S and stud young TE Tonyan.

 

 

SF has a lot of RBs, not a lot of rushing yards.  Decent young WRs. Kittle.  Defense that gives up more points than the Seahawks (huge drop-off from last year).

 

Colts have Taylor (rest of RBs negligible) and 1 WR over 700 yards.  Mediocre at best TEs.  Good O-line.  

 

NO has Thomas coming off of injury, Kamara, aging Sanders and Josh Hill (not a good TE room over there), solid D.

 

NO is the only team I see that either of these guys walk onto and go farther than they did with their current teams this past season.  Cap issues make it a non-starter, as you point out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • H2o changed the title to Is Russell Wilson The Next QB To Be On The Move - Tensions Seem To Be Growing

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...