Check out these Poison Pills - 2nd Paragraph

jps_tex

Member
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Hawks sign Burleson to offer sheet

The Seahawks signed Vikings WR Nate Burleson to an offer sheet today, giving Minnesota seven days to match or lose the three-year veteran to Seattle.

Get this (and I am not making this up): The offer is a seven-year, $49 million deal with $5.25 million guaranteed and two hilarious poison pills guaranteeing the contract if he plays a certain number of games in the State of Minnesota :lmao2: , or if his average-per-year exceeds the average of the highest-paid running back on the team (I need to confirm the specifics on the second poison pill, but you get the point). (You think Burleson can ever average more than Alexander? :lmao: )The poison pills are obviously direct retribution for the contract Minnesota used to sign LG Steve Hutchinson from the Seahawks.

Obviously this deal will be reworked after a few years, but they did what they had to do to make this look like the seven-year, $49 million offer the Vikings made to Hutchinson. I hope to have more on the financial breakdown, but like I said, the fact that $5.25 million is guaranteed tells you this is, in reality, a four-year deal dressed up as a bigger package to make a point. Now we'll see if the league addresses these poison pills.

If Minnesota does not match the Seahawks' offer, the Vikings would receive Seattle's third-round choice in the upcoming draft. It's a low third-round pick given that Seattle advanced to the Super Bowl last season, but the pick would still give the Vikings ammunition should they try to trade up the draft board.

The timing of the offer sheet is perhaps a little surprising given that NFL teams have until April 21 to make offers to restricted free agents, and this is a league that sometimes needs a deadline to get things done. But Seattle's interest in Burleson has been well established since the team visited with him last week at Seahawks headquarters. Seattle also might be looking to move proactively after suffering some free-agent losses, notably Hutchinson and WR Joe Jurevicius. The team also fell short in a recent attempt to acquire DE John Abraham from the Jets.

Burleson, who turns 25 in August, caught 68 passes for 1,006 yards and nine touchdowns in 2004. His numbers fell to 30-328-1 last season as injuries limited him to nine games. The Vikings also suffered through a disappointing season headlined by that most classy of forays into nautical naughtiness on the waters of Lake Minnetonka.

Seattle views Burleson, 6-0 and 192 pounds, as possessing needed play-making ability. The team would presumably be looking to pair Burleson with WR Darrell Jackson, allowing WR Bobby Engram to retake his former position as the third receiver. This would leave WR D.J. Hackett and WR Peter Warrick fighting for time as the fourth receiver, with WR Alex Bannister trying to return from a broken clavicle.

Is Burleson the answer for Seattle? Depends on the question. Skeptics will point out that his lone 1,000-yard season came with WR Randy Moss on the other side of the field. Believers will note that Burleson is a young player with Seattle roots (O'Dea High) and good stats when healthy.

The Vikings have not been particularly aggressive in trying to sign Burleson for the long term. They have a new staff and they also have WR Koren Robinson, the player Seattle envisioned in its lineup all along. Without the off-field issues that ruined Robinson's career in Seattle, the Seahawks wouldn't be in the market for a young prospect such as Burleson.

For a more detailed look at the restricted market, check out this story by ESPN.com's Len Pasquarelli, and check out the chart at the bottom of this NFL.com story to see how frequently RFAs change teams.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
That is awesome.

Ya think there is going to be some serious reworking of the RFA/transition rules in the future?
 

BeWare94

Benched
Messages
568
Reaction score
0
Tass said:
Heh...that's awesome.

They better hope Nate Burleson is a fool because if I were him I'd be like, "look, you offered me x amount of dollars to come here and that is what you will pay me or you can release/trade me".

Just a stupid a**ed move by the She-Hawks.
 

baj1dallas

New Member
Messages
6,556
Reaction score
1
BeWare94 said:
They better hope Nate Burleson is a fool because if I were him I'd be like, "look, you offered me x amount of dollars to come here and that is what you will pay me or you can release/trade me".

Just a stupid a$$ed move by the She-Hawks.


LOL...did you read the article? If you went to your boss and said, "hey pay me $10 mil or fire me"...what do you think they're gonna do?
 

WoodysGirl

U.N.I.T.Y
Staff member
Messages
79,281
Reaction score
45,652
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Seahawks | Burleson offer sheet details
Fri, 24 Mar 2006 15:35:55 -0800

Updating a previous report, Mike Sando, of the Tacoma News Tribune, reports the Seattle Seahawks' offer sheet to Minnesota Vikings WR Nate Burleson is a seven-year, $49 million deal with $5.25 million guaranteed. The deal also includes two poison pills guaranteeing the entire $49 million if he plays a certain number of games in the state of Minnesota, or if his average-per-year exceeds the average of the highest-paid running back on the team. The pills are in direct retribution for the contract the Vikings used to sign former Seahawks OLG Steve Hutchinson.
 

Hostile

The Duke
Messages
119,565
Reaction score
4,544
WoodysGirl said:
Seahawks | Burleson offer sheet details
Fri, 24 Mar 2006 15:35:55 -0800

Updating a previous report, Mike Sando, of the Tacoma News Tribune, reports the Seattle Seahawks' offer sheet to Minnesota Vikings WR Nate Burleson is a seven-year, $49 million deal with $5.25 million guaranteed. The deal also includes two poison pills guaranteeing the entire $49 million if he plays a certain number of games in the state of Minnesota, or if his average-per-year exceeds the average of the highest-paid running back on the team. The pills are in direct retribution for the contract the Vikings used to sign former Seahawks OLG Steve Hutchinson.
How many games would he have to play in Minnesota if he's going to be playing in Seattle?

It almost sounds like Seattle is going to pay him to stay where he is. That's a bit extreme.
 

aznhalf

New Member
Messages
882
Reaction score
0
Haha, I hope the league allows it. The Viking's poisin pill might have cost us Brown! Though I'm okay with how it turned out in the end.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
BeWare94 said:
They better hope Nate Burleson is a fool because if I were him I'd be like, "look, you offered me x amount of dollars to come here and that is what you will pay me or you can release/trade me".

Just a stupid a$$ed move by the She-Hawks.

Perhaps you don't understand the article.
 

sago1

Active Member
Messages
7,791
Reaction score
0
Vikings probably aren't interested in signing Burleston and would be normally ok with letting him go & getting a 3rd pick for him. On the other hand, might the Vikes be so annoyed by the tenor that they decide to fight fire with fire re the 2 poison pills.

Addressing the 2nd poison pill first: contract says ..."or if the average per year exceeds the average of the highest paid running back on the team"...
To me it isn't clear what the average per year refers to: does it refer to number of carries vs number of passes caught or yards per catch vs yards per carry or average pay per year (for WR) vs average pay per year for (RB). I worked in a law office years ago and this sentence is unclear which leaves it open to any interpretation by any party (Burleson's agent could claim the most beneficial interpretation to his client is correct one).

Also don't think a special master would view the restriction on number of games played in the State of Minnesota as viable. Sure would be interesting if somehow Vikes demanded clarification by special master which might force a clarification detrimental to Seattle.

I'd say this matter will be brought up by NFL in upcoming meetings in Orlando. I think Seattle screwed up by not franchising Hutchinson instead of tagging him as transitional; now they going overboard but others could follow suit.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
sago1 said:
Addressing the 2nd poison pill first: contract says ..."or if the average per year exceeds the average of the highest paid running back on the team"...
To me it isn't clear what the average per year refers to: does it refer to number of carries vs number of passes caught or yards per catch vs yards per carry or average pay per year (for WR) vs average pay per year for (RB). I worked in a law office years ago and this sentence is unclear which leaves it open to any interpretation by any party (Burleson's agent could claim the most beneficial interpretation to his client is correct one).

Also don't think a special master would view the restriction on number of games played in the State of Minnesota as viable. Sure would be interesting if somehow Vikes demanded clarification by special master which might force a clarification detrimental to Seattle.

The first is about salary. Burleson would be getting more than any of the RBs in Minny -- meaning if they matched it would guarantee the deal.

Seattle put in two pills in case a hearing voided one of them.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
CanadianCowboysFan said:
Those are ridiculous terms and the NFL should delete them.

Same as the Vikes did to the Hawks. Terms that, if the Hawks had matched would have forced them to guarantee Hutch's deal. There are no particular rules on these issues in the CBA -- as one agent put it "if it isn't specifically disallowed by the CBA then it is an allowable term"

The Hawks are making a mockery of the system b/c they are pissed about the Hutch deal.
 

Shaun

Member
Messages
326
Reaction score
5
abersonc said:
Same as the Vikes did to the Hawks. Terms that, if the Hawks had matched would have forced them to guarantee Hutch's deal. There are no particular rules on these issues in the CBA -- as one agent put it "if it isn't specifically disallowed by the CBA then it is an allowable term"

The Hawks are making a mockery of the system b/c they are pissed about the Hutch deal.

And they should. The terms of the Minnesota deal were ridiculous.
 

dmoore

Member
Messages
449
Reaction score
0
Well, I like how the Seahawks are striking back. Still, the Vikings got one of the best young guards in the league and the Seahawks are getting a reciever who hasn't really proved himself. I think the league needs to really fix this sort of thing, because it's getting out of hand.
 

seoulman

New Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Hostile said:
How many games would he have to play in Minnesota if he's going to be playing in Seattle?

It almost sounds like Seattle is going to pay him to stay where he is. That's a bit extreme.

What is means is that Burleson plays a certain number of games in Minnesota the entire contract will be guaranteed, which of course would be hellish for Minnesota given the dollar amount of the contract. The other poison pill would guarantee Burleson's contract if his per year average were higher than the highest paid running back on the team. Since Seattle has Alexander, they wouldn't be in danger. But since Minnesota doesn't have any running back that is paid more than that (on average), they would either have to sign a running back for a higher per year average than Burleson or guarantee his entire contract. Either way would be serious pain for Minnesota.

They are basically giving Minnesota a taste of their own medicine.
 
Top