Found this story on Seattle PI and I had to attach it here! It has some very interesting points about Why the Hawks are not rushing to sign Shaun...and also some insite into the way he thinks...
After reading this ...I think there could be a long holdout looming!
Holding out is a big gamble for Shaun. If the offense really sizzles in practice and the preseason, which it might because Holmgren will feel more liberated without the obligation of handing to Shaun 25 times a game, than his leverage is going to be severely diminished. That is if he has any leverage to begin with.
ReplyDeletePosted by Geoff Smock
Shaun has a ton of leverage. 70 touchdowns and 6892 yards worth.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
Amen, Paulie. Look at the sidebar from the Times article:
ReplyDeleteAlexander the Great
Shaun Alexander has scored 72 touchdowns (62 rushing, 10 receiving) in his 80-game NFL career, the fifth-best total in league history by a player in his first 80 games. Player Span TDs
Jim Brown 1957-62 85
Emmitt Smith 1990-95 75
Chuck Foreman 1973-78 73
Lance Alworth 1962-68 73
Shaun Alexander 2000-04 72
Steve Van Buren 1944-51 71
Jerry Rice 1985-90 71
Lenny Moore 1956-62 69
Marcus Allen 1982-87 69
Jim Taylor 1958-62 67
Walter Payton 1975-80 65
Earl Campbell 1978-83 65
Terrell Davis 1995-00 65
That's a damn exlusive club. Sign the dude! I want more!
'Hawks have more leverage... 370 thousand reasons Shaun wants to be at the first game.
ReplyDeleteAgree, Shaun, sign the tender so they can sign you to a long contract.
Posted by JoSCh
The leverage argument hinges on how you feel about having Carter and Morris in the backfield. Personally, I'm not as confident as others.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBlue, please delete that message. There's no reason to have that posted.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
Do you really believe they won't talk about it? Of course they will say they didn't. Just like no teams talked to Larry Brown during the season. Shaun doesn't want to sign his tender until they have a deal worked out at least in theory. Let's say they don't have something worked out. Shaun signs, comes to camp, and is injured the first day of camp. All his leverage to get a decent long term deal is gone. but, if they have something worked out before he signs the tender, he can sign the long term almost immediately after.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
What was with the phone number? That was pointless.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree that Shaun is hurting himself but not just himself. It hurts everyone.
ReplyDeleteBut then again, he doesn't shoulder ALL the blame. The reason he will be holding out is because there is no mutual agreement.
This is why I hate the franchise tag, and think it should be abolished. Anything that contributes to such a degree to an essential work stoppage of star players is bad for football.
It could be argued that it's an important tool for owners to keep franchise players, but when you look at the results of using the tag in retrospect, in most cases it would have been better for the team to just flat sign him to a contract, or release them altogether.
We have the rare exception of Walter Jones - but in reality, how often does a player and team respond to such a holdout with little or no letup? It's rare, indeed, which is why teams like the Patriots benefit from a 'take it or leave it' contract policy. They are actually better off not using the tag altogether.
Again, anything that contributes to what amounts to a work stoppage from a star player is bad for football. Sure, it will happen in regular contract disputes anyway, but not as often and/or prolonged.
I'm sure that the franchise tag will be at very least adjusted with the next CBA. Originally, it was meant to reward players. Of course it has not, it's turned into a punishment of sorts.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP