'Hawks remove franchise tag on Leroy Hill?

[Sweezo]

No links yet, but this was just reported on the NFL network. Huh. Suddenly our linebacking corps doesn't look as strong. Guess the 'Hawks adding Curry while Hill rejected a 6 year/$36 million deal meant the 'Hawks decided to just...go another direction.

This completely screws Hill, who now gets to try and cash in after the bulk of free agency is done and teams have just spent the day spending picks and committing themselves to future contracts. He thought he had leverage when he was franchised...well, not so much, I guess.

EDIT: Nevermind...John over at Field Gulls asked Sando about it. Sounds like someone the NFL Network mentioned it only as a possibility for now, but it hasn't actually happened yet.

[Billy]

Wow... big news.

I wonder if it's a matter of the Hawks wanting to sign him long term or if it's simply a matter of not wanting him now with Curry on board.

[Sweezo]

Nevermind...sounds like the guy on the NFL Network was mis-quoted.

[asdf1223]

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/player ... FL&id=3304
its on rotoworld...

[Sweezo]

Yeah, now it sounds like it's back in the 'confirmed' bin. Huh.

[nuke the whales]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4101934
It's on ESPN.com as being confirmed by the team. I guess I wasn't too far off in the draft thread.

[Bulltalk]

Leroy Hill definitely seems gone from the Seahawks. If/when he signs with another team, the Hawks will probably receive a compensatory 3rd Round draft pick next year. This kind of explains why they were willing to trade their 3rd round pick on the first day of the draft.

[Ex-hippie]

If/when he signs with another team, the Hawks will probably receive a compensatory 3rd Round draft pick next year.

With no tag whatsoever? How does that work? Isn't he a UFA now?

[Bulltalk]

If/when he signs with another team, the Hawks will probably receive a compensatory 3rd Round draft pick next year.

With no tag whatsoever? How does that work? Isn't he a UFA now?

From John Clayton, courtesy of ESPN:

5. The Seattle Seahawks' trade with the Eagles to acquire Penn State wide receiver Deon Butler might reveal how the Seahawks will handle their business during the next year. Earlier in the day, the Seahawks dropped the franchise tag from linebacker Leroy Hill, making him a free agent. Hill is the best player on the market and should command a big contract. He'll also become the eighth free agent to leave this offseason and should command a third-round compensatory choice next year. Once Hill signs, the Seahawks will have a net loss of five free agents, so they could get four compensatory picks next year. That's why they had the luxury to trade for a fast receiver.

[Ex-hippie]

That's interesting. So does that mean they can't go after another free agent at any position this offseason, lest they lose the compensatory pick?

[Bulltalk]

That's interesting. So does that mean they can't go after another free agent at any position this offseason, lest they lose the compensatory pick?

I'm starting to enter my gray zone on some of this stuff. I'm listening to some sports radio at work this morning, and it's mostly all Seahawks talk. The Hill story is big. Softy just said that if this Hill thing turns into another Hutch thing, then he's had it with Ruskell.

The feeling seems to be that there's no middle ground with the Hill situation. Hill signs with us, the move was good. Hill doesn't sign with us, the move was shyt. Ruskell's logic was this in interviews:

--Doesn't like the franchise tag at all. Thinks it is a disincentive to getting things done.
--Drafting Curry gave him instant flexibility (he could remove franchise tag from Hill, and free up CAP room to sign other FA's, guys like Lucas, though he didn't mention him by name).
--Wants players in camp ASAP, as the team is implementing a new system.
--Hopes this will speed up the negotiating process with Hill.

The thing is, however, that Ruskell made us vulnerable to losing Hill, just like he did with Hutch. In this, this is somewhat of a replay of it, ie Ruskell flirting with disaster. I think the off-field thing with Hill made this possible for Ruskell to justify such a move again, along with drafting Curry.

I don't know...we'll see.

[Sweezo]

I'm starting to enter my gray zone on some of this stuff. I'm listening to some sports radio at work this morning, and it's mostly all Seahawks talk. The Hill story is big. Softy just said that if this Hill thing turns into another Hutch thing, then he's had it with Ruskell.

Softy, please...

I like Hill, but he had no business being franchised anyway. He was offered a great contract, turned it down, and then decided to sandbag the first camp of the season. Didn't he see how well this technique has worked out for players in he past?

Hill's valuable to the 'Hawks, but not as valuable as he was a week ago. If he's trying to gouge the 'Hawks, I'm perfectly fine with him leaving if the 'Hawks have plans for the cap space.

Hutch was the best guard in the game when he left. Hill's certainly not the best LB in the game...hell, last year he wasn't the best LB on the team!

I want Hill back, and expect him to come back, but I think his value is a bit overestimated.

[Bulltalk]

I'm starting to enter my gray zone on some of this stuff. I'm listening to some sports radio at work this morning, and it's mostly all Seahawks talk. The Hill story is big. Softy just said that if this Hill thing turns into another Hutch thing, then he's had it with Ruskell.

Softy, please...

I like Hill, but he had no business being franchised anyway. He was offered a great contract, turned it down, and then decided to sandbag the first camp of the season. Didn't he see how well this technique has worked out for players in he past?

Hill's valuable to the 'Hawks, but not as valuable as he was a week ago. If he's trying to gouge the 'Hawks, I'm perfectly fine with him leaving if the 'Hawks have plans for the cap space.

Hutch was the best guard in the game when he left. Hill's certainly not the best LB in the game...hell, last year he wasn't the best LB on the team!

I want Hill back, and expect him to come back, but I think his value is a bit overestimated.

This remains to be seen, and I'm wrestling with this notion now. A lot of factors come into play, not the least of which is the CAP. If, for instance, Hill doesn't sign a long term contract with us soon, the franchise tag (the salary of it) works against our CAP, decreases our flexibility to fill in any gaps to our roster we might have in a timely fashion. In this sense, I can see where Ruskell is coming from. I think Ruskell wants all the flexibility he can muster now so as to ensure he can get this roster together in a timely fashion for next season, especially with a new coach and a new system being put into place.

There's a part of me that agrees with playing "hard-arse" about such things. I want our team working hard together from day one, coming together as a team ASAP. I want us to be ready on opening day to compete as a complete unit. I don't want players holding us hostage from achieving such a state of preparedness.

[Ex-hippie]

I like Hill, but he had no business being franchised anyway.

This is what I thought as well, although it seems to me the franchise tag ain't what it used to be. If Darren Sproles, O.J. Atogwe, Antonio Bryant and, yes, Matt Cassel are worthy of the tag, then so is Hill. Hill is probably on a par with another OLB in the division who also got tagged, Karlos Dansby.

[Sweezo]

I like Hill, but he had no business being franchised anyway.

This is what I thought as well, although it seems to me the franchise tag ain't what it used to be. If Darren Sproles, O.J. Atogwe, Antonio Bryant and, yes, Matt Cassel are worthy of the tag, then so is Hill. Hill is probably on a par with another OLB in the division who also got tagged, Karlos Dansby.

It also depends on the position. I think you can make an argument that, if some of those players were let got and not tagged at the time, it would have potentiall crippled a franchise. Or the team knew they couldn't let such a valuable chip get away at the time, like Cassell.

As of right now, if Hill doesn't come back...the team loses something, but aren't really crippled. Curry/Tatupu/whomever is a perfectly adequate linebacking corps.

Meanwhile it seems clear that, in the midst of all the wheeling and dealing the last couple days, the team knew they had some issues at CB and FB that needed to be addressed. Those issues weren't addressed in the draft, so they drop the tag on Hill, and promptly sign a CB and FB.

[Ex-hippie]

I like Hill, but he had no business being franchised anyway.

This is what I thought as well, although it seems to me the franchise tag ain't what it used to be. If Darren Sproles, O.J. Atogwe, Antonio Bryant and, yes, Matt Cassel are worthy of the tag, then so is Hill. Hill is probably on a par with another OLB in the division who also got tagged, Karlos Dansby.

It also depends on the position. I think you can make an argument that, if some of those players were let got and not tagged at the time, it would have potentiall crippled a franchise. Or the team knew they couldn't let such a valuable chip get away at the time, like Cassell.

As of right now, if Hill doesn't come back...the team loses something, but aren't really crippled. Curry/Tatupu/whomever is a perfectly adequate linebacking corps.

Meanwhile it seems clear that, in the midst of all the wheeling and dealing the last couple days, the team knew they had some issues at CB and FB that needed to be addressed. Those issues weren't addressed in the draft, so they drop the tag on Hill, and promptly sign a CB and FB.

Sproles, who has never been and will never be a starting running back? Bryant, a journeyman wideout with a sketchy background on a team that's otherwise being completely dismantled? And I don't care what people say about Cassel, he's a system quarterback and if Scott Pioli hadn't moved on to Kansas City (and Josh McDaniels hadn't moved to Denver and bid the price up), the Pats would have been stuck with an albatross contract for a backup.

[Bulltalk]

I got the impression from a KJR interview with Mora this morning that there stands a decent chance Hill will resign with the Hawks in the coming days. My feeling is that Hill resigns with us in the coming days, or the next few weeks, or that he doesn't resign with us at all. It seems the Hawks want something done ASAP, or to drop the thought of Hill altogether. I think they are REALLY ratcheting up this "sign-now-or-else" point of view to Hill and his agent, making this an either/or/but soon proposition. I think Hill and his agent have to make a choice soon, or expect to be playing elsewhere. I don't think the Hawks are fooling around about this.

[Billy]

http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/seahawk ... /30/p40863

In an interview with KJR-AM’s Mitch Levy, Seattle head coach Jim Mora said the team could have a deal in place by the end of the day or tomorrow, and is confident Hill will remain with the team.

“We believe we made the right decision,” Mora said about the team rescinding the franchise tag. “Sure it was a risky decision. A very risky decision. … If for some reason Leroy decides to go somewhere else then we’re open to criticism. We probably deserve it. But my belief in talking to Leroy as much as I have is that he’ll be wearing a Seattle Seahawk uniform next year. I feel very confident of that.”

I definitely agree Bulltalk. With the skipping of team functions and the refusal to sign the contract, pulling the offer made the most sense. Now with Curry in the fold the Hawks can go back to the table and tell him flat out that he can sign on or he's had the last 3 months to find something better and he can take that option.

The move was definitely risky, and certainly carried with it some negative vibes. But in the end I think the Hawks made the best play they could for the organization. This situation needs a resolution and hopefully it will come with Hill being back in the fold.

[Sweezo]

Agreed about removing the tag. I appreciate Ruskell playing hardball here...he gave Hill a great offer, he acted foolishly, now Ruskell's showing him what leverage is all about. Far different than Hutch where we really couldn't afford to let him go and Ruskell decided to make a poor choice. If Hill leaves, we at least have other NFL caliber linebackers to replace him.

Sproles, who has never been and will never be a starting running back? Bryant, a journeyman wideout with a sketchy background on a team that's otherwise being completely dismantled? And I don't care what people say about Cassel, he's a system quarterback and if Scott Pioli hadn't moved on to Kansas City (and Josh McDaniels hadn't moved to Denver and bid the price up), the Pats would have been stuck with an albatross contract for a backup.

Sure. I don't disagree with that. Like I said, you could make an argument for their value to their team. But would I have tagged Sproles if I were the Chargers? Good God no. I thought the Pats were crazy for tagging Cassel but I guess they knew what they were doing if you liked results based analysis.

Bryant, for all his faults, probably would've found a good deal elsewhere given what he does on the football field each year and the amount of teams prior to the draft that were desperate for WR help. Hell, look how much we paid for Housh...Bryant would've gotten paid by someone.

The franchise tag has become a bit of a joke. Hell, we used it on a kicker once, right? Anyone see this team fall apart when Josh Brown finally left?

[Ex-hippie]

The franchise tag has become a bit of a joke. Hell, we used it on a kicker once, right? Anyone see this team fall apart when Josh Brown finally left?

You really want to ask that question after the 2008 season?!?

In the end, the franchise tag is something teams use for leverage. You don't want to have to sign the guy to the one-year tender. It does guarantee the player a minimum deal and so that sets the parameters for the long-term deal you hope to negotiate. While a top-five salary for a player who isn't one of the five best at his position seems like a bad business move, salaries just go up and up every year, and in a few years the rest of the league will catch up. (Also known as the Washburn Rule: a contract that looked totally ridiculous when signed might actually look kind of decent after two or three years.)

And, of course, tagging an outside linebacker costs a lot less than tagging a quarterback.