PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Seattle Seahawks agree to 4-year/$57.4M extension with Richard Sherman


Status
Not open for further replies.
Richard Sherman's real contract doesn't actually begin until 2015. His deal only gave him a bonus to sign an extension, still playing under the rookie deal etc. etc. He's something like a $3.5 million cap charge this year. I don't understand why you think Sherman's deal counts while Gronk's doesn't. Gronk has a $5.5 million cap charge this year and to this point he has been perpetually injured and unavailable.

Because we are talking about the next four years with Sherman in the Seahawks and you are talking about players this year with the Pats. Gronk isn't even guaranteed to see the meat of his contract since the Pats may not pick up his $10 million option next year. And if they do, Mankins will likely be gone by then.

If you were comparing the next four years of Gronk and Sherman, then you would have a point. But then you have to take Mankins out of the equation because this is likely going to be his last year as a Patriot unless he takes a pay cut.



I used overthecap.com for all my contract value comparisons.
http://overthecap.com/top-player-salaries.php?Position=43OLB
You see Mayo is #1 by a healthy margin.

But over the cap is wrong. Mayo signed a seven year deal for $48.5 million but they have him making $9.7 a year average. How does that math add up?

Sportrac has him as the 19th ranked LB in terms of average salary. It doesn't break it down by 4-3 OLB or anything like that.

http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/average/linebacker/limit-25/


I think you are engaged in an exercise of wishful thinking. That you used Gronkowski's contract while ignoring that Sherman's deal is also an extension, in a thread ON Sherman's extension, tells me you're just expressing the hope Seattle falls off a cliff somehow. I don't think they've been any unwiser with their players and money than New England, and I would expect McCourty and (perhaps) Revis to each wind up with similar deals, provided the latter aces his try-out year like Sherman aced last year.

First, there is no wishful thinking going on at all I am stating the fact that all these new deals are going to force the Seahawks to make sacrifices in other areas. That is a fact. I stated they were a deep team this past year because they had a lot of star players on rookie deals and allowed them to add players like Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett last year (which they won't be able to do something similar in two years). And that is a fact also. That means there is no guarantees about their success and the quality of their defense over the next four years. I never said that they would fall off the cliff. I also never said they wouldn't win the next five Super Bowls. All I said is there is no guarantees.

Second, I wouldn't accusing me of being a hypocrite when you are being one yourself. You said that the Pats currently have four players being paid as 1-2 at their position. Then you fail to acknowledge that Gronk will only be that case IF he is on the roster in 2016 and other TEs like Vernon Davis and Jimmy Graham don't get bigger deals. You also fail to acknowldge that by that time Mankins will either be gone or playing on a much reduced salary.

Third, I never said the Pats weren't dealing with paying big contracts that forces them to leave holes at other positions. They do. Now the Seahawks are just catching up to them. If the Pats were in the same cap position the Seahawks were last year over the last five years, they probably would have won 2-3 Super Bowls. The fact of the matter is they were never in a position where all their marquee stars were in rookie deals at the same time so they could have a stacked team from top to bottom. Have you been paying attention over the last few years with everyone complaining about the huge holes (or forced to go cheap and young) at certain positions the Pats have had over the last few years whether it was WR last year or safety position years before that?

All I said was now that the Seahawks are getting all their star players into their second contracts, they will not have the cap flexibility to be stacked at all areas. With their secondary being paid so much, they are probably going to have leave holes in their front seven and use either average to below average players to start or play key roles just like the Pats and most other teams. That means there is no guarantees of what type of team (or defense) they will be over the next four years. That is the reality of the NFL.

That is what I am responding to the people who act like locking up Sherman, Thomas, and Chancellor guarantees them anything. It doesn't. It certainly helps to guarantee them being a top team and defense, but it could hurt them too. That is all I am saying.
 
Last edited:

2015 looks suspect to me for the Seahawks. Roughly 50% of their players are making $700k or less - essentially the league minimum. Their QB cap number will climb to the top of the chart. I agree that the 2014 numbers look decent, especially since Sherman took a very 2014-friendly deal in exchange for big guaranteed money.
 
If you look at all LBs you mix in a lot of end-of-line players like Matthews, Hali and Mathis who are paid a premium because they are really rush ends, which is not what Mayo is. They have Julius Peppers as an LB.

You want to add ILBs to the mix, fine. That puts Mayo #2 behind Patrick Willis.


That's not true. Mayo makes $7.1 million a year on his new deal. David Harris makes $9 million a year. Brian Cushing makes $8.75 million. James Laurenitis makes $8.3 million. Chad Greenway (a 4-3 OLB) makes $8.1 million. Paul Kruger makes $8.1 million. Daryl Washing makes $8 million. Demeco Ryan makes $7.8 million. Paul Pasluzny makes $7.5 million a year. Donald Butler makes $7.4 million a year.

I don't have the guaranteed money, but Mayo is low in that area because he didn't get a lot in guarantees and he signed a much longer deal than most of these guys. So he less likely to get all of his contract than a lot of these guys.

http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/average/linebacker/limit-25/
 
Sherman is "interesting" for the wrong reasons and they all have to do with shooting his mouth off. This new contract certainly won't help matters. Another case in point today:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...nfl-wouldnt-ban-a-donald-sterling-type-owner/

This guy is too comfortable stirring the racial pot for no reason other than provocatively calling attention to himself.

The NFL is more of a bottom line league. If it doesn’t effect their bottom line, they’re not as concerned,” Sherman said.

Sounds like Joker got to Sherman regarding Goodell's NFL.
 
Other than Peyton Manning and anyone on the Jet's, Richard Sherman is my most hated player in the NFL.

Sherman and Company will always have my deepest appreciation and respect for having dismantled the Broncos in the scope and style that they did..
 
I'm not saying they shouldn't have locked them up. I am saying that ultimately, it will hurt them in other areas of the team.

They benefitted last year from having all these guys on rookie deals. Going forward they are going to start to have holes and depth issues that they didn't have last year. If one of these guys go down, it could become a big issue. To think the Seahawks are going to stacked for the next four to five years is not necessarily the truth.
Wait, how do you know for sure they won't continue to draft well and fill their holes with cheap young talent like they did before?
 
Overpaying (or I guess more accurately, paying top dollar) for a player like Sherman who is a consistent, impact performer is not a bad play. If you want great players, you have to pay great player prices. Where teams get themselves in trouble, is when they pay good players at great player prices. Mike Wallace getting a big deal is silly, and IMO Flacco is not worth franchise QB money, he just got lucky with his SB win timing and the Ravens had no choice if they wanted to save face. Sherman deserves top dollar, he's that good.
 
Wait, how do you know for sure they won't continue to draft well and fill their holes with cheap young talent like they did before?

Did you actually read my post? I said I don't know what they are going to be like in the next few years. All I said that there are NO GUARANTEES that they will be a top defense or a top team and the new contracts will mean they will have holes that they didn't have last year. Even with perfect drafting, you are likely going to have holes when your cap starts to get top heavy. It is a fact of the NFL?

So yes, if you totally ignore what I wrote and take my post out of context, yes I do know exactly how the Seahawks will draft. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
I'm not saying they shouldn't have locked them up. I am saying that ultimately, it will hurt them in other areas of the team.

They benefitted last year from having all these guys on rookie deals. Going forward they are going to start to have holes and depth issues that they didn't have last year. If one of these guys go down, it could become a big issue. To think the Seahawks are going to stacked for the next four to five years is not necessarily the truth.
Did you actually read my post? I said I don't know what they are going to be like in the next few years. All I said that there are NO GUARANTEES that they will be a top defense or a top team and the new contracts will mean they will have holes that they didn't have last year. Even with perfect drafting, you are likely going to have holes when your cap starts to get top heavy. It is a fact of the NFL?

So yes, if you totally ignore what I wrote and take my post out of context, yes I do know exactly how the Seahawks will draft. Thanks for pointing that out.
You said it will start hurting them in other areas of the team. And they are going to start to have holes and depth issues. Sounded pretty definitive to me.

Neither of those things will happen if they draft as well as they have the past few years.
 
You said it will start hurting them in other areas of the team. And they are going to start to have holes and depth issues. Sounded pretty definitive to me.

Neither of those things will happen if they draft as well as they have the past few years.

It is most likely going to happen. That is a fact. When you start getting top heavy you are going to have holes. That is a fact of the NFL. Even if they have spectacular drafts, they are going to have more holes in upcoming years than they had last year. It is unavoidable. They are not going to get guys like Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett to be back up rotational guys. If they avoid these holes, they will be the first team in NFL history in the free agency area to do so for more than a year or two.

And you are spinning what I am saying. Every team has depth issues and holes. The Seahawks were probably had the least amount of holes in a long time because of their contract structures. I am not saying they are going to have major depth issues and holes that is going to make them go from a 13-3 Super Bowl team to a 6-10 team (although it could happen). I am saying they are going to most likely have more holes a year or two from now than they did last year because of the star players are going into their second contracts. Anyone who doesn't believe that is probably kidding themselves.
 
It is most likely going to happen. That is a fact. When you start getting top heavy you are going to have holes. That is a fact of the NFL. Even if they have spectacular drafts, they are going to have more holes in upcoming years than they had last year. It is unavoidable. They are not going to get guys like Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett to be back up rotational guys. If they avoid these holes, they will be the first team in NFL history in the free agency area to do so for more than a year or two.

And you are spinning what I am saying. Every team has depth issues and holes. The Seahawks were probably had the least amount of holes in a long time because of their contract structures. I am not saying they are going to have major depth issues and holes that is going to make them go from a 13-3 Super Bowl team to a 6-10 team (although it could happen). I am saying they are going to most likely have more holes a year or two from now than they did last year because of the star players are going into their second contracts. Anyone who doesn't believe that is probably kidding themselves.

And look at some of my "definitive" statements:

If one of these guys go down, it could become a big issue.

To think the Seahawks are going to stacked for the next four to five years is not necessarily the truth.

The only thing I said that when you start paying players top dollar, you are going to have to sacrifice in other areas. That is a fact. You look at every team in the league that pays more than one player top dollar and you see exactly that. Even great drafting cannot overcome that.

Look at the Pats. They have had solid drafts for the last three or four years and still have holes and depth issues because they cannot spend money to pay players everywhere to fill all the holes (for example, they could have paid for TJ Ward or Donte Whitner if they felt they could have afforded the cap room). The good teams overcome these holes.
 
Last edited:
It is most likely going to happen. That is a fact. When you start getting top heavy you are going to have holes. That is a fact of the NFL. Even if they have spectacular drafts, they are going to have more holes in upcoming years than they had last year. It is unavoidable. They are not going to get guys like Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett to be back up rotational guys. If they avoid these holes, they will be the first team in NFL history in the free agency area to do so for more than a year or two.

And you are spinning what I am saying. Every team has depth issues and holes. The Seahawks were probably had the least amount of holes in a long time because of their contract structures. I am not saying they are going to have major depth issues and holes that is going to make them go from a 13-3 Super Bowl team to a 6-10 team (although it could happen). I am saying they are going to most likely have more holes a year or two from now than they did last year because of the star players are going into their second contracts. Anyone who doesn't believe that is probably kidding themselves.
You're kidding yourself thinking they're going to go 6-10 anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
You're kidding yourself thinking they're going to go 6-10 anytime soon.

It is certainly possible that could happen because any team can have a drop off like that with injuries or just players having down years or whatever, but I wouldn't bet on it. Again, I never said they would go 6-10 in the near future or that it is anything more than a remote possibility. I said:

I am not saying they are going to have major depth issues and holes that is going to make them go from a 13-3 Super Bowl team to a 6-10 team (although it could happen).

If I was betting I would bet they are a 10 plus win team for the foreseeable future.

But thanks for twisting my words again. It is fun arguing with you about things I didn't say.
 
Other than Peyton Manning and anyone on the Jet's, Richard Sherman is my most hated player in the NFL.

I personally like Sherman far more than Manning
 
It is fun arguing with you about things I didn't say.

Speaking of things not said in this thread, please note I did not call you a hypocrite. I do apologize that the source I used (overthecap.com, which was posted elsewhere in this thread) does not seem to have its ducks in a row on contract comparisons. Your source appears to be more accurate.

I don't have the time to go point for point on your post but it would be rude to ignore you so I'll just post generally.

If your point is that the Seahawks are just getting to the point roster-wise where the Pats are already at, I don't understand all the stuff where you're arguing about comparables and implying its unwise for them to pay their top, young talent. I would think if the first thing were true, you'd agree there are comparables without getting into distinctions like option bonuses, or that Mankins' contract doesn't run quite as long as Sherman's, or bring it up at all when it sure looks like we'll be backing up the Brinks truck for Revis and McCourty, assuming they perform like Richard Sherman/Earl Thomas.

And the Patriots have had a lot of talent signed to cheap deals themselves, just like the Seahawks, and I think the reason we didn't win Super Bowls is because they weren't moved to their best position soon enough (McCourty) or got injured (Gronkowski, Hernandez, Edelman, Vereen, and even Talib, given the draft pick trade and what he was resigned for).

If Richard Sherman had injured his hip in the 1st quarter the Seahawks would have lost the NFC Championship Game. Doesn't matter if he was on a rookie deal or had signed an extension, or how many mid-level FAs the Seahawks had for depth. Their core was healthy, ours wasn't, Seahawks won, Pats came up short.
 
I agree.

If Pats can't spare an extra $2.5-$3m more a season on what they are paying Revis this year it will be pretty head scratching.

they can keep him if they want with the CAP going even higher next season but I would not call it a head scratcher if they don't. he will be 30 next year so paying a 30 year old CB 14 million with Browner Dennard and Ryan on the roster may not be a must sign they could take that money and put it into the OL and extend Brady's career a year or two
 
they can keep him if they want with the CAP going even higher next season but I would not call it a head scratcher if they don't. he will be 30 next year so paying a 30 year old CB 14 million with Browner Dennard and Ryan on the roster may not be a must sign they could take that money and put it into the OL and extend Brady's career a year or two
And have horrible pass defense in a passing league, great plan.
 
And have horrible pass defense in a passing league, great plan.

if browner shows he can be a starter and Ryan at lest plays at the same level he did as a rookie they wont be horrible as long as they stay injury free on the DL a big part of the pass defense getting worst at the end of the year was them missing 3 pro bowlers on the front 7
 
2015 looks suspect to me for the Seahawks. Roughly 50% of their players are making $700k or less - essentially the league minimum.

Please explain the correlation between those two statements. If having 50% of your signed players for the 2015 season playing for a salary less than $700K means that a team's cap situation is suspect, a good number of teams are in suspect shape for the 2015 season according to your standards.
 
if browner shows he can be a starter and Ryan at lest plays at the same level he did as a rookie they wont be horrible as long as they stay injury free on the DL a big part of the pass defense getting worst at the end of the year was them missing 3 pro bowlers on the front 7
Wrong. The patriots have never had even a decent pass defense without having a true #1 corner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft #5 and Thoughts About Dugger Signing
Back
Top