Lori Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2377300 SEATTLE -- The Seahawks must match the guarantee provision in the $49 million, seven-year deal offered to All-Pro guard Steve Hutchinson by the Minnesota Vikings if the NFC champions want to keep their transition player. Special master Stephen Burbank, the University of Pennsylvania law professor who serves as the final word in many key contractual disputes, ruled against Seattle, saying a provision guaranteeing all of the $49 million in an offer sheet Hutchinson signed with Minnesota should he not be the team's highest-paid offensive lineman is valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I can't believe they let the Vikings get away with that... That's some bull sh--. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 21, 2006 Author Share Posted March 21, 2006 I can't believe they let the Vikings get away with that... That's some bull sh--. 636815[/snapback] I could never believe they let the Colts get away with it in Wolford's deal, either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWesternBill Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Dirty tricks like this will get you nothing but bad karma...lookout vikings fans, the collective power of the seattle voodoo association (CPSVDA) May just even the tide with some sketchy curse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoremore#24 Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Any chance Walter Jones could Restructure this years salary so Hutch therefore would be the highest paid lineman this year?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 21, 2006 Author Share Posted March 21, 2006 Any chance Walter Jones could Restructure this years salary so Hutch therefore would be the highest paid lineman this year?? 636893[/snapback] Supposedly already tried that. Per the linked ESPN story: The Seahawks had argued Monday morning that because they have recently re-negotiated Pro Bowl left tackle Walter Jones' $54.5 million, seven-year contract by adding an eighth, voidable year, Jones' team-best lineman deal now has an annual value below that of Hutchinson's offer. After the re-negotiation, Jones' annual base salary would dip to $6.81 million -- just below Hutchinson's $7 million annual average if Seattle matched Minnesota's offer. Thus, the Seahawks argued Monday morning they should not have to guarantee the rest of Hutchinson's new deal. Berthelsen said Burbank did not elaborate in his ruling. But Berthelsen said the decision validated the NFLPA's stance that the conditions at the time Hutchinson signed the offer sheet with the Vikings are the conditions Seattle must match -- meaning Hutchinson wasn't the highest-paid Seahawks linemen then, so Seattle must guarantee all $49 million of the Vikings' deal to match it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I could never believe they let the Colts get away with it in Wolford's deal, either... 636822[/snapback] I dont agree with it all, i think the ruling was B.S. I also think the vikings are a joke for pulling and getting away with this crap. does anyone know if the provision was highest paid in terms of total value, or on a year to year basis? But the difference in Wolford's contract was that if he wasnt the highest offensive player at any time, they his contract had to escalate so he was the highest paid. Hutch's merely says if he isnt the highest paid player, the entire contract is guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoremore#24 Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Supposedly already tried that. Per the linked ESPN story: 636898[/snapback] Thanks. I didnt click it first. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I dont agree with it all, i think the ruling was B.S. I also think the vikings are a joke for pulling and getting away with this crap. does anyone know if the provision was highest paid in terms of total value, or on a year to year basis? But the difference in Wolford's contract was that if he wasnt the highest offensive player at any time, they his contract had to escalate so he was the highest paid. Hutch's merely says if he isnt the highest paid player, the entire contract is guaranteed. 636905[/snapback] This ruling completely boggles the mind. The spirit of the transition tag rule is to allow a transition player to go out and get a killer offer and permit his team the opportunity to match if they so choose. Permitting agents and other teams to cleverly devise these posion pill clauses circumvents the spirit of the rule because the player's current team, in matching, actually is forced to give so much more that it is untenable for them to do so. That the spirit of the rule is as mentioned above is supported by the fact that the players and owners immediately agreed to plug the hole exploited by the Colts to get Wolford. Unfortunately, it is never possible to anticipate every possible scenario by which a so-called matching offer be made not matching through the cleverness of others. And apparently much to the short-sighted delight of the NFLPA. But most importantly, the deal as a whole is simply not of the same value for both teams as required by the current rule if the Seahawks were to match. How can one argue with a straight face that the value of the deal is the same for both sides? That it is simply a material term of the contract that must be adhered to in order to match? The numbers may be the same, but the value of a guaranteed contract is far greater than the one being given by the Vikings. I have to wonder if Hutchison even understood that once the offer sheet was signed, he was unquestionably not going to be a Seahawk any longer? Sometimes I wonder how much these players leave up to the agent. Of course, it may have been that Hutchison really wanted to leave, but if I remember correctly, I don't think Wolford realized that he had signed himself away from the Bills, did he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 But the difference in Wolford's contract was that if he wasnt the highest offensive player at any time, they his contract had to escalate so he was the highest paid. Hutch's merely says if he isnt the highest paid player, the entire contract is guaranteed. 636905[/snapback] The way they supposedly plugged the loophole was that no term could be added that forced the matching team to pay more than the team making the offer sheet. So instead of forcing the Seahawks to pay more than the number offered, they instead made the consequence of matching that the entire contract be guaranteed, something that no team in their right mind would do, not even the Vikings. To argue that this is the same value is a joke. All one has to do is review the history of NFL contracts to see that virtually no contract sails through its term unchanged or unterminated early. While it is technically possible that the Vikings could pay him all of the $49 Million, they are not obligated to do so. If the Seahawks match, they would be obligated to do so. I cannot see how these two contracts are of the same value, when one team is not obligated to pay the total compensation, while the other one is. It is a freakin' joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lv-Bills Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 You know what else though.......what about Hutch himself putting the screws to the Hawks. I mean, that's kind of cheap of Hutchinson too. He could have gone back and told the Seahawks what he wanted OR he would sign this particular deal. What Hutchinson did, doesn't completely sit well with me either. Let alone the Vikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I can't believe they let the Vikings get away with that... That's some bull sh--. 636815[/snapback] why not????????????????????????? if a team is creative and writes acontract and you have the right to match the contract.thats what it means you have to match the exact contract your player just signed............i dont understand why this even went to a judge. minny offered a contract to steve and seattle didnt want to match all the terms of the contract...you cant have it all your way..we lost wilford the same way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Seahawks | Team does not match offer to Hutchinson Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:13:13 -0800 John Clayton, of ESPN.com, reports the Seattle Seahawks have not matched the offer the Minnesota Vikings made to Seahawks transition free agent OG Steve Hutchinson. Hutchinson now becomes a member of the Vikings. The Seahawks will save $6.391 in salary cap by letting Hutchinson leave. The Vikings come out with Hutch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Jamie, read buffalobob's posts...I think he's right on. How can you not find that cheap on Minnesota's part? They knew what kinda contract Walter Jones had and manipulated it so it was just about impossible for him to return to Seattle. It doesn't matter who does it, it's still cheap in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Seahawks | Team does not match offer to HutchinsonMon, 20 Mar 2006 21:13:13 -0800 John Clayton, of ESPN.com, reports the Seattle Seahawks have not matched the offer the Minnesota Vikings made to Seahawks transition free agent OG Steve Hutchinson. Hutchinson now becomes a member of the Vikings. The Seahawks will save $6.391 in salary cap by letting Hutchinson leave. The Vikings come out with Hutch. 637094[/snapback] WHAT? They didn't want to guarantee a guard $49 Million? I'm shocked! Well, I feel for the Hawks. As Bills fans we know how that feels. They've been had! And once again a clever agent and the NFLPA gets away with one through a loophole. I'm sure Tom Condon feels very pleased with himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts