A few thoughts on the Frank Clark situation

March 10th, 2019 | Written by Rob Staton

I’m going to guess what’s going on here. You decide if you think this is fair (and whether you agree with the conclusion).

I think the Seahawks have a number in mind for Frank Clark. The offer isn’t as high as he would like.

It’s possible (but who really knows?) that the rumoured ‘interest’ from other teams (including Buffalo) was an attempt through the media to just let the player know what a possible alternative looked like.

(And if the Bills weren’t interested, or felt they were being used in negotiations, it makes sense for them to end the rumour immediately as they did).

In turn, we now see this tweet emerge coincidentally during the NFL Network’s ‘pre-free agency’ show…

This, to me, looks like the counter. Seattle’s leverage is a possible trade. Clark’s leverage is he can walk in a year.

Another negotiation being played out in the media.

What does it all likely mean? Talks aren’t close on a new deal, essentially. And while the Seahawks clearly don’t want to lose Clark —- they can ill afford another player to leave the club without compensation.

It makes sense to see what’s out there. Possibly nothing appealing. For every Amari Cooper and Khalil Mack trade, there’s a lukewarm market for Earl Thomas or Antonio Brown. Trade value is difficult to project.

With four key players all reaching free agency in 2020 (Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner, Jarran Reed and Clark), there’s a reason why the tweet above doesn’t even reference a second tag. It’ll very likely belong to Russell Wilson.

This is why this is such a challenging off-season. And it’s why some difficult decisions need to be made.

Nobody wants to see Clark traded. But how much do you want to see him leave in free agency next year?

148 Responses to “A few thoughts on the Frank Clark situation”

  1. Trevor says:

    If he is not going report to camp then make your best offer prior to draft. If he turns that down then move him for whatever you can get.

    As far as that goes it should be the same for Reed, Wagner and Russ. You can’t franchise all three next year so if you don’t get an extension done this off season you loose a minimum of 2 of these guys.

    If they won’t pay Frank what he wants and trade him. Then can’t extend Bobby or Reed I think the best option is a full tear down as this roster is not close to being an SB contender.

    Go all in with the rebuild and trade everyone 30 + Russ, Wags, Brown , Baldwin and start over. The alternative is years of being decent but never great.

    So disappointed with how this off season is starting after such a quality fun season of football.

    Can someone please tell me why Frank was not extended last year as soon as Danielle Hunter signed as a comp. We did not learn anything about Clark last year that they did not already know.

    The handling of Bennett, Earl, Sherm and now Clark is terrible management and foresight on behalf ofPC/ JS. IMO

    • lil'stink says:

      Agreed about Bennett and Earl. Sherm was a malcontent and was injured, though. His situation was handled the only way possible. And it’s still too early to tell about Clark.

  2. Trevor says:

    Rob unless a team is an SB contenter why would they give the Hawks anything more than a 2nd or 3rd round pick for Clark when they know they can wait for him to be a free agent next year. It is the same situation we had with Earl last year isn’t it? At least with Earl last year we had the threat of a franchise tag the following year.

    I reiterate once again I hate the franchise tag and don’t see how it helps teams.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If there was no tag, Trevor, Clark would be leaving tomorrow instead of in 12 months. It’s not the tag.

      If it’s a 2 then it’s a 2. Get a deal done or move on.

      • Trevor says:

        My point exactly about the tag all it does is prolong decisions and the eventual outcome by 12 months while often creating tons of drama and tearing teams apart.

        I challenge anyone to give me examples where weaker market teams have used the tag to their advantage which was its supposed purpose.

        I agree if it is a 2 it is a 2 and move on. They should have done that with Earl and Sherm too.

        Sorry for the tone of my message just so frustrated the off season is starting this way after such a fun year of football that gave me hope again as a Hawks fan.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I understand the frustration. But as pointed out yesterday, if you didn’t have the tag then you’d have a small number of elite teams in the best markets. Because none of the others would be able to hold onto their players. So if you want a load of basket case feeder clubs to the small number of elite, get rid of the tag.

          • skip says:

            NFL business is ugly. Yes it is hard on those of us who become attached to our players, but it’s part of being an NFL fan now. If guys like Earl and Richard and Frank want to find fault with 12s for merely insisting that Schneider do everything in his power to defend that flag, then they need to look where the other 3 and the thumb are pointing….they care about money, not the 12s. Likewise, as much as we have enjoyed Frank Clark since he was drafted (for my part the best thing about Clark is the way he owned his mistake and has now obviously changed his behavior and attitude, kudos Frank), he is worth 2 #1 draft choices if someone signs him as a result of the tag, the market for his services will be established risk free because of the tag, and the Hawks have a 12 month window to negotiate a deal for him OR DRAFT HIS REPLACEMENT.

      • Duceyq says:

        I think the best trade partners for Seattle are the Jets, Colts, and Raiders. All three teams have a need at DE and cap space to sign him to a long term deal. Frank is only 25 and just entering his prime.

        I could see Seattle sending Clark and pick 21 to the Jets for their 3rd pick and maybe a late pick (3rd or later added or swapped)

        Colts and a Raiders would just be Clark straight up for there late 1st RD picks. Colts (26) or Raiders (24) or (27).

        • Rob Staton says:

          I can’t see the #3 pick being involved. It’s too valuable.

          Also not 100% sold Clark nets you a first straight up.

          • Duceyq says:

            What if Penny were included to the Jets?

            Nevertheless, I can see Clark netting a first from one of these teams. 25 years old, clean off the field and just reaching his prime. Mack and Cooper netted firsts…not saying Clark is Mack but his value should be greater than Cooper’s. I think straight up for late 1st’s is very reasonable considering the Raiders have 3 1’s and the Colts might miss out on Edge rushers they’re possibly targeting at 26. Clark is a sure thing for a team trying be a legit SB contender this season.

            For the Jets moving from 3 to 21 gets them a premiere edge rusher they would probably draft at 3 but still allow them to draft either a RB or WR at 21 to help Darnold.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I can’t imagine any trade with the Jets that involves #3 overall. It’s a total non starter IMO.

              It’s hard to say whether they could net a late first. It’s possible. Not a given though. Not with this DL draft class.

  3. Tired says:

    I’m tired of all this. The contract negotiations in the media. The entitlement of the players and the teams. I just want to watch football, to enjoy it. I want to know who’s on the team and I’d like consistency in that regard. The Seahawks playing out negotiations through the media, isn’t it obvious that’ll piss off the entitled players? The entitled players, do any of them actually want to win and play and be loved (Tom Brady anyone?) by the community? Russell, Frank, Earl, If each takes a million less (or whatever), then the Seahawks can keep KJ, kept a kicker a couple years ago, maybe had consistency on the o line. Why don’t they pay Frank and Russell and Bobby 65 mil combined and then 50 other players 2.4 million? Because that just doesn’t work. Does anyone really believe Antonio Brown is worth what the raiders just paid him?? These guys are greedy. Pete and John or whoever the leakers are, are idiots. The drama is insatiable and petty and not all productive. I’d have liked the Seahawks to have traded Frank a year ago for a couple picks, it was obvious then when he didn’t join offseason workouts that this drama was coming. Trade him now! Two seconds, whatever, get something before they get nothing. And pray for Jacob Martin!

    • Volume12 says:

      Pray for Jacob Martin? It’s not set in stone that both sides (Hawks FO & Frank) will be in a stalemate.

      Having Jacob Martin is being overlooked to the extreme anyways. This is how teams get ahead. Finding cheap, club controlled players at premium positions, i.e. pass rusher.

      I know it sucks that these guys only want $ instead of winning because why should fans than turn around and spend $ on their team and I understand the emotional reaction that comes with being a fan, but really all these guys should care about is making as much as you can and ASAP. Especially when it comes to the game of football.

      • Sea Mode says:

        That’s the other leverage the Hawks have, esp. for a guy coming off a rookie deal who hasn’t yet cashed in big: 16 games is a huge risk of injury and ending up with way less than they could get this very instant by walking into a room and signing a piece of paper.

        I can see QBs willing to risk playing on the tag, but it’s a much bigger risk for other positions. Rather than worry about pushing for $3m extra apy I’d be securing myself and my family $60m guaranteed right now, “respect” or whatever they want to call it be darned.

      • mishima says:

        Amen. I think J. Martin will provide 75% of F. Clark at a fraction of the cost.

        Clark is being hyped as the second coming of Khalil Mack. He’s not: 2.5 sacks in 6 games against the NFC West. Take away his 2 big games against GB/Bulaga and OAK/K. Miller and he finishes the season with 9.5 sacks. He’s good, but not $21m/year good.

        Leverage his newfound stardom into a deep and cheap roster. Oakland?

        • lil'stink says:

          Martin’s progress during the season was heartening. But he’s not 75% the player Frank Clark is. Not sure Martin is big enough to be a base DE in run packages. And he can’t line up all around the line like Clark can. He’s too small. If he could turn into the next Chris Clemons that would be great. But Clark was better last year than Clemons ever was.

          • mishima says:

            Agree. Different players.

            • Awake says:

              Martin generated pressure. Reed did too. Jones did in year one and for some reason didn’t get much opportunity last year. Poona Ford generated pressure. The Seahawks need help from the edge generating pressure. It’s clear Frank Clark is going after money, the FO has a different number in mind. Otherwise, I think we’d have heard more than Clark loves the Seahawks and the Seahawks love Clark. Trade him while his value is high. Build around Russell Wilson. Build a defense through the draft, cheaply. If these guys aren’t about the team, move on, trade em. Winning and success will keep Seattle as a destination for those players who want to win. And those who want money, let em go and get something for them.

    • King_Rajesh says:

      “The entitled players, do any of them actually want to win and play and be loved (Tom Brady anyone?) by the community?”

      Not everyone is married to a supermodel worth almost half a billion dollars.

    • From your comment, it sounds like you would be better suited following college football. Then you don’t have to worry about those awful greedy players trying to earn a living! Okay, I get we all root for the Seahawks, so we are more attached to the name on the front of the jersey than any name on the back, but you can’t blame players for trying to maximize their opportunity. NFL careers are short, get all the money you can. It’s not like it is money coming out of yours, mine, or any of our pockets anyway! As long as PC/JS can field a competitive team, idc how they choose to negotiate. The false media reports can definitely get annoying, but that’s why you have to take everything you see from Rap or Schef with a grain of salt. As soon as I see a report like the Frank Clark one above, I immediately consider the source or why it might be dropping. Frank seemed genuinely excited about getting tagged, but he knows he has to play the leverage game and threaten not to sign it. I don’t think there is any chance this turns messy, I just think this is unfortunately the rules of the game. The NFL is a business, it’s an industry worth many billions of dollars. Just comes with the territory of being a fan.

      • Rob Staton says:

        I don’t think we can blame players for trying to max their opportunity. I also think a reality check is needed in some cases. Players seem to think they don’t get offered or paid max value because evil corporate forces are at work. No. There’s a salary cap. Teams have to constantly prioritize where they invest. Not because they want to stop anyone earning what they’re due. Simply because that’s the game.

        Furthermore, the cap increases a bit every year. But average salaries are ballooning. They jumped when Olivier Vernon got his money. Now they’re jumping again — up to $20m plus. Eventually, the cost of a salary is going to increase beyond inflation of the cap.

        And I respect Clark and anyone else for wanting every single penny they can get. I also think when you’re being offered a huge sum of money to play a game and you decide you want even more — that’s your choice and you are welcome to make that call. But it’s not the teams and owners doing anything wrong in that scenario. They have a right to judge your value and not necessarily have to make you the highest paid in the league.

      • GimmeABreak says:

        “From your comment, it sounds like you would be better suited following college football. Then you don’t have to worry about those awful greedy players trying to earn a living!”

        Earn a living? I make $40K a year and I can pay for everything I need to survive. Nobody NEEDS $20M+ for a year of work. No one. Players used to play sports for the love of the game. Now they just play for the love of money.

  4. Doug says:

    The Seahawks cannot afford to let Frank walk next year without any compensation. It would be better for the team to find a willing trade partner (in the AFC!) prior to the draft if no extension is agreed before then.

    Having Reed, Clark, Wagner, and Wilson coming up all at the same time puts enormous pressure on the team. If one or more is likely to be lost through agency, then it is better to trade before the draft (and free agency) to maximize the replacement options available.

    • Mark Souza says:

      Sounds like he’s forcing his way out of town. Trade him now while you can get something (Earl Thomas lesson learned). If someone offered a 2, 3, and 4 for him, I’d be happy. We then could use #21 on DL, and potentially the 2nd round for a bookend, and have the picks we need to fill in some holes without trading away our first rounder.

  5. SwissHawk says:

    This doesn’t add up. Frank was actively celebrating on social media a few days ago and now he won’t sign? Doesn’t make sense.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Just playing his card I think. Like the Seahawks did to Jay Glazer (IMO).

    • Trevor says:

      I am guessing he was pissed the Hawks leaked the trade rumor and this was his response as Rob pointed out in the article. In this case it seems the Hawks were the ones who started down this rat hole.

      Frank seems like a really emotional guy so this could get really ugly really quickly.

  6. Volume12 says:

    He won’t sign the tag but they’ll have him for 16 games? Unless I’m mistaken, that’s a head scratcher.

    • Trevor says:

      I think they mean he won’t sign till season begins and will skip off season and training camp.

      Frank, Locket and KJ are my three favorite Hawks. Would hate to see 2 of 3 gone this off season.

      • Volume12 says:

        That’s not how it was worded though. Strange.

        I agree with your first 2. BWagz over KJ for me. And by no means do I dislike KJ or wanna see him leave.

        • Trevor says:

          I really like Wags too. He and KJ have just been such consummate pro’s. Low maintenance and letting thier play do the talking. I think the injuries will mean the Hawks move on from KJ but he will be missed in that locker room.

    • John_s says:

      It’s pretty straightforward he’s not showing up until he starts losing money which is week 1

    • lil'stink says:

      I thought the wording was confusing as well. I assume he meant that we still have his rights for 2019, even if he doesn’t sign the tag. Since he can’t play for anyone else unless we trade him, he is still “ours” for 16 games.

  7. kevin mullen says:

    I think he’s gonna ask for Chandler Jones type money: 5yrs, $82.5mil total, $31mil guaranteed. Which should put him around #3 or #4 for all DE’s behind JJ Watt, Demarcus Lawerance (When Dallas finally locks him in), Oliver Vernon (5yrs, $85mil/total, $52.5mil/guaranteed), and possibly ahead of Chandler Jones.

    • Trevor says:

      If that is the case then the deal should be done.

      • Sea Mode says:

        Yeah, no way the ask is anywhere under $20m/apy.

        • Jeff M. says:

          Per https://overthecap.com/position/edge-rusher/ Khalil Mack is the only edge rusher to beat 20m/yr (Lawrence would as well if he signed his second tag but seems unlikely they go the Cousins route with him rather than getting the deal done).

          19m/yr would tie him with Von Miller for #2 among edge rushers. It seems like a deal should be doable around there. If the Seahawks are only offering 16/17ish they’re probably being unreasonable here but so is Clark if he’s asking for as much money as Mack.

      • kevin mullen says:

        Well, I meant they’ll ask for something around JJ Watt money but settle for Chandler Jones type terms. If I were Frank’s agent, I’d rally for $100mil+.

        But if a trade were to be had I’d ask Oakland’s 24th, 35th, & 106th.

  8. Sea Mode says:

    I just wanted to take a second and laugh at how funny it is that the seemingly highest form of threat from teams to players right now is “sign or we’ll trade you to Buffalo…” 😂😂😂

  9. SamL says:

    The chiefs just released Justin Houston. Do you think the Seahawks should grab him? Whether we trade Clark or not we need more pass rush. Houston could offer it at an affordable price. He’s on the older side, we could extend his career by rotating him in and out as he loses some of his speed and burst.

  10. Trevor says:

    I blame this situation completely on PC/JS they should have extended Clark last year after Hunter signed with Vikings. They are almost identical player comps and the deal should have been easy to avoiding this mess.

    If Pete wants to run the Hawks like USC as Sherm said with can constant roster turnover that is fine but if they do they need to learn who to get as much draft capital as possible and not let elite players like Sherm and Earl leave for nothing.

    • You are absolutely right, It just seems like JS/PC are so clueless when it comes to the off season. They either over pay for players through trades, or give up draft picks for next to nothing just so they can get more players. Then when they have players that are disgruntled instead of trading them when they can, they wait until everyone knows they need to get rid of the player and they get nothing for them. It is absolutely ridiculous that we are going through this again this off season.

      If the only way they can win is through the draft, then trade everyone they got, acquire picks and go rebuild. We cant constantly win while we watch the front office being so poorly run. So frustrated with this. So tired of these players just caring all about money and nothing else. I have taking jobs for less to be part of a team I enjoyed working for. I just can’t get behind these new school players.

      • Matt says:

        Yep, exactly. They are getting worse at talent evaluation and acquisition; and now they seemingly can’t keep guys here. It is very fair to question what they are doing at this point.

        Do I love the new school behavior with contract negotiations? No…but, it’s reality. The Seahawks FO seems to want to operate in a world that doesn’t exist. They need to pull their heads out and deal with how things are, not what they wish it to be.

    • GerryG says:

      Pump the breaks on the PC/JS blew it. Frank’s agent was all over the radio telling how they had taken out an injury insurance policy on him and they were 100% wanting to test the open market to receive maximum $$.

      Plus, as I stated yesterday we dont know what max $ is yet because nobody has signed. Is max $ Donald/Mack, or is more, or is it less? Ford, Larwence, Clowney and Clark are in a staring contest with their teams and each other.

      Hopefully the Flowers free agent deal will shed some light on this.

      Also, Rob I definitely agree the media take.

      • Trevor says:

        I am saying they should have extended him last off season. Frank took an insurance policy out after he was not extended and was on the last year of his deal which was smart. I am saying it should never have gotten to that point particularly after they traded Bennett and knew Avril would not be back.

        I firmly believe they blew it plain and simple. Thought they could get him one more year on a motivated cheap deal to prove he could be the guy when he was the focus of an offense instead of realizing what they had. As a result now we have this mess and they need to pay way more or loose him.

        Frank should have been locked up just like Locket last off season plain and simple.

        • Volume12 says:

          It’s almost as if all of this is a game (competition is probably the right word) to PC/JS. See how many times you can trade back to get a guy your comfortable with, risking core pieces walking for nothing, bringing in re-treads and castoffs expecting, no, needing them to contribute or play big minutes. Risk, risk, and more risk.

          There’s certainly been more positives than negatives, but IDK if it’s a good or bad thing.

          • Sanders says:

            I agree. There is risk by operating like this as a GM. Signing a bunch of mid-tier and lower-tier free agents last year and trading draft picks for a bad backup QB and a special teams player was confusing to me. By us signing so many free agents last year, we lost out on multiple compensation draft picks this year. I felt like Schneider was throwing away draft picks for re-tread players and castoffs. During the draft Schneider loves trading down to acquire more picks, but then the rest of the year he giving away draft picks for other teams bottom of the roster players.

        • GerryG says:

          As you note in your post they like to extend guys (Lock). You don’t know (and neither do I) if they tried to extend Clark. Maybe they did, maybe they tried to lock him up in the high teens, and him and his agent said screw that, young DE break the bank (ie Vernon to Giants).

          We don’t know what happened.

          • Elmer says:

            Right. It’s important to remember that John and Pete know a lot more than we do. For instance, the difference between guys they really want to extend and guys hey want to make it look like they want to extend. They have more information than we do.

    • Dale Roberts says:

      Yeah… let’s go back to Dennis Erickson as coach or Tim Ruskell as GM. Come on guys this is about as successful of an era of Seahawk football as you could possibly hope for. Enjoy the ride as long as PC wants be here.

      • Trevor says:

        No one is calling for PC or JS to get fired I just think they blew it when it comes to this situation and several others like it recently. I just hope they have a plan and stick to it. When they won they had huge roster turnover, built through the draft, identified core players and exteded them.

        Since then they have used draft capital to aquire questionable character guys and let key guys walk for nothing. Get back to what made you great is all I am saying.

        Not sure where you got the idea anyone was asking for a change at the top because I certainly am not and appreciate the success PC/ JS brought the organization. No point living in the past either though.

  11. Matt says:

    As someone who doesn’t think this team is particularly close to being a legit contender – they need to get a deal done or trade him before the 2019 draft. This team has to stop messing around. We are in a dire need of talent – if you can’t retain existing talent, then you have to get some sort of capital for them. It makes ZERO sense to let Frank play for a year then walk in 2020. He’s not winning us a Super Bowl this year. And a comp pick in 2021 is worthless.

    I don’t know what is going on with this organization – but it’s fair to wonder why things are dysfunctional. I don’t expect contract negotiations to be pretty – but this is starting to stink.

    Hell – this is an emotional reaction, but are we going to do the same with Russ and Bobby next offseason? Either you have a team where people want to be here and you pay them what they are worth – or it’s time to start moving on from guys and getting something from them.

    I do not want to trade Russell Wilson – but if this FO can’t figure this stuff out; then friggin trade these guys and at least get something. Seriously – I’m starting to wonder what the heck is going on here. This organization seems like it is destined for the cellar if they can’t figure out how to keep talent here. That’s part of the job description – we are getting mounting evidence that they are struggling to keep talent here.

    Very frustrating offseason so far. I’m starting to lose the faith in these guys. Frank has made every possible public overture that he wants to be here…so, what happened?

    • Bigten says:

      I don’t disagree with your opinion that this team isn’t really close to contending. But I would temper the emotion on throwing out the baby with the bath water. Building through the draft, which I also agree with PC/JS on, isn’t about trading everyone away and always drafting. It’s about trusting the draft and there coaching.
      I disagree on your acertion that frank has made very public his interest to stay in Seattle, so if he’s traded or not signed long term its the FO fault. Clark is super smart to continue to make these public statements, because it builds his bargaining power further. He looks like the good guy, team guy, but behind closed doors, he’s being a boulder, unmoving from his current stance of being the highest paid. He has all the power in that regard. Seahawks either sign him to his demands, or someone does next year when the market is reset. And if they don’t, they also look like the bad guys. It’s brilliant personal branding/marketing to build leverage. RW and camp could take notes on this, except at least the hawks have a year extra of tagging power. It reminds me of the kaep situation, not getting political at all or want to argue that, but he could essentially ask what he wants (starter oh, 20+ mill apy) if the team doesn’t want to, then he can still play the good guy in the media. Clark is in a similar situation. And that’s his right! Nothing at all wrong with it, I kinda like it ( but I also really enjoy the process of all this, super interesting to me).

      • Yes but this is the point we are making. The front office has to have the foresight to figure out if they are going to be able to sign a talent or not. If they reach out and realize they are not going to be able to get a deal done, then they need to be able to trade that player before it blows up and every team out there realizes they need to get rid of them or loose them to free agency. When they act to late they lose all value the player had.

        If they would have figured this out sooner, then they would have been able to get a nice trade package for him, because teams would have thought that we needed draft picks because we had so few. That’s a lot different then teams realizing we are about to lose a player and so they can wait until free agency next year.

        They have done this now three off seasons in a row. and before that they could have traded Chancellor when he held out for more money. Instead they bring him back sign him to a huge contract with mega money guaranteed in case of injury and hamstring the team.

        I’m not saying it’s time to move on, but come on we have to call a spade a spade at this point.

        • Bigten says:

          I’m not disagreeing with that idea. Quite the opposite actually. I was just making a point that there shouldn’t be “losing faith”. I actually was on the trade RW train. My point is to not get so frustrated with the front office if we can’t KEEP Clark. Or RW for that matter. Because they are both in a comparatively superior bargaining position. No where did I say not to trade him. If we can do the trade Rob proposed, I’d be all over that. Then watch a QB drop to around 9 (lock) and someone jump up above Broncos to grab him, say the dolphins or redskins. Netting us a second this year or a first next year. I think that trade would be enormous for our growth as a team.

  12. Edgar says:

    As Rob stated, this is going to be a very important offseason.

    4 high end players needing new contracts and there’s really only room for 3 tops while keeping the cap from being completely hamstrung. Wagner might be the first one to go, but Clark’s massive per year number could be keenly spent on 2-4 pass rushers/defenders found as year to year castoffs. The 4 draft picks is where the problem starts in my eyes. They can’t let anymore top players leave without return picks to replenish draft stock. Hopefully the right choices are made and we continue to stay hungry and competitive with an upside. Right now it feels like our ceiling is the #5 and 6# seed.

    • Trevor says:

      Cast off veteran pass rushers are not going to get this team any closer to an SB though. Isn’t winning a championship the goal and that can only be done with elite talent.

      Veteran pass rushers are like the finishing piece once you have your elite talent in place not to replace them.

      That is why I am sick of the constant trading out of Rd#1 as well because they need to from trading away draft capital. People always always point to Russ, Sherm, Kam, Frank and Locket as being guys they picked after round #1. But Clark would have been except for the DV. Russ and Locket had first round talent but were under sized and Pete is a magician at finding and coaching up DB’s.

      Think about all the picks they have missed on between Rds 2-5 after trading back. The list is endless. The Hawks have a competitive advantage with Pete and should continue drafting DBs late and Turing them into NFL starters. The rest of the positions on the roster they have shown they are no better than league average at drafting and the chances of hitting on elite difference making talent is far greater in Rd #1 than Rd#3. Also get back to using the UDFA recruitment as a strength. Look at Poona last year.

      Anyways sorry for the ranting, just pissed today with all this nonsense with Frank and thinking about what is coming with Russ, Bobby and Reed.

      • Edgar says:

        Trevor, I’d personally rather have 2 2nds and 2 3rds trading the 1 every year if starting with 7 picks and drafting in the late teens or 20’s but I can see your point.
        I’m a Frank Clark fan, but 20 million per year in cap cost while Wilson is looking at possibly being 35 is a little heavy handed for 2 players. If they are all in on Wilson the next 5+ years, it would behoove them to spread the defensive money around more because of the injury probability involved. The moment Clark happens to go down for even 2-4 games that’s 10% of the cap sitting on the sidelines while another 15%+ is behind center. Like I said, some tough decisions are coming soon.

      • Sanders says:

        I get frustrated with trading down, but I usually look who is the player we drafted first after trading down. A lot of the time the player they traded down for is either average or a bust…with Clark being the exception.

        The last two years we have know that we need to get new young talent at LB. We where in position the last two drafts to draft porotype LB for the Seahawks as far as size, length, speed, and proven production in college. We could have had LB’s TJ Watt, or Darrius Leonard, or Leighton Vander Esch. We need to do a better job as projecting the roster forward, especially during the re-tooling years.

        • Edgar says:

          Hindsight drafting always works best. For every good to great player passed on, there was 1-2 players at that position picked who were busts. Aaron Curry was ‘can’t miss’ at #4.

          If you look back at the last 10 years of drafts, out of the first 64 players chosen, you can pretty much count on both hands the number that ended up being legitimate first choice pro bowlers.

          • DCD2 says:

            That’s not true at all.

            Take a look at 2016 and 2017 for easy reference. There are 7 pro-bowlers taken in the first round of each draft. There have been 10 from the 2015 draft. That’s 24 from 3 recent drafts… enough for both hands and both feet, your ears, eyes and 7 more classes to go.

            Not saying that first round picks don’t bust, but the odds of hitting on a 1st rounder are exponentially higher than other rounds.

            • Bigten says:

              Out of curiousity, how many of those were already out of our range? I.e. top 15 picks. The point is, after the first wave of legit first rounders (10-15) then the rest are similar second round talents, so trading back allows for more chances at those 2nd round talents, it’s the shot gun tactic, more chances to hit. I actually love the penny pick from last year. Not defending the picks of the hawks, especially 2017s McDowell and pocic, but if you look, a lot of good players come in the middle second to middle third, so having more shots at those is better than one shot in the 20s.

              • DCD2 says:

                Definitely a fair point. I know that most of them were in the top half of the first. From 2017, off the top of my head, I remember there were only two 2nd rounders Buddha and JuJu (I tend to remember the Pac12 guys) and then a few good RB’s in the 3rd.

                I feel like it’s a question of would you rather have 3rd and 2 or 2nd and 15? One shot at a 3 pointer or 2 half court shots?

                Regardless of which approach you prefer, I just wanted to point out that claiming the top 640 picks from the last 10 draft only yielded 10 all-pros was completely ridiculous.

            • Edgar says:

              DCD2, what I meant was out of each years 2 rds, first 64 players taken…….maybe 10 are legit pro bowlers.

  13. Kenny Sloth says:

    On #Seahawks pass-rusher Frank Clark: He won’t be signing his franchise tag or showing up to training camp unless the Seahawks give him the deal that he has earned, I’m told. If they don’t, they’ll only have him for another 16 games… when other top FAs are up, too.

    Rappoport via twitter reports

    • Sea Mode says:

      Somebody didn’t read the article… 😉

      (On a more positive note, how about Pulisic yesterday!)

      • Kenny Sloth says:

        Truuuuue. I didnt realize it was a new post.

        To be fair. I didnt read either Frank Clark trade piece and it’s the first time in a long long time I’ve skipped an article from Rob.

        Really not buying any of the chatter and I really don’t want to.

        (Pulisic has been decent in his limited time since the transfer went through. He won’t replace Eden Hazard, but hopefully the EPL is a good fit. Can he keep up with the physicality in the EPL??? Can’t wait to see him in RWB in this coming window. Assuming he’s called)

  14. King_Rajesh says:

    How many times do our top tier talents have to depart with us getting nothing for them before we admit that John Schneider and Pete Carroll either suck at free agency or are driving talent away with their lowball offers?

    For example: they screwed Golden Tate and he walked, they let Sherman walk for nothing instead of trading him the year prior, they’re letting Earl walk for nothing this year, KJ Wright is walking away for nothing…

    Low-key, Schneider sucks at Free Agency. He either gets WORKED on deals (overpaying for Harvin, buying Jimmy Graham and having Bevell/Cable ruin the investment, giving $8m to Luke Joeckel) or lowballs talent so that nobody comes here (Jared Allen, TJ Lang).

    If he didn’t sign Bennett and Avril in 2013, this would be a huge discussion point.

    • lil'stink says:

      You really hate everyone involved with this team other than Russell Wilson, don’t you?

    • Troy says:

      The thing I haven’t liked is that I don’t think JS has ever really gotten the better of a trade, every trade seems to be him getting lesser value to get what “he wants”, ie he gets more draft picks but he gets screwed on value.

      This era of us letting elite talent walk is getting pretty tiring, I hope he turns it around this offseason.

      • BobbyK says:

        Beast Mode and Chris Clemons were pretty stud trades. It’s been awhile though.

      • GerryG says:

        Justin Coleman trade was really bad (sarcasm).

        Brown trade wasn’t bad either, we fixed a broken spot on the line. It’s his fault Lane failed a physical

        • Troy says:

          You guys are right, I exaggerated when I said he’s never got the better of a trade. I meant to say it seems like he rarely gets the better of a trade, and the fact you guys could only bring up a few examples proves my point I think, which is that JS is not really a good negotiator overall when it comes to trades.

          • DCD2 says:

            It’s that their failures were high profile: Graham, Percy, Richardson all cost a lot. We got Coleman for a 7th and lynch was a 5/6(?). Those were low risk moves that panned out. When it comes to blockbuster deals, JS hasn’t got the better of any deals that I can recall.

  15. Jared Marshall says:

    Well, I stand by what I said that franchising Clark was a bright neon billboard screaming something very weird was going on in the negotiations. I think it’s almost assured now that the FO has been using the possibility of a trade as their primary leverage — if not intent. I was seriously worried, because as much as this FO has shown to be savvy and competent; there have been a number of occasions where their assessment of a player’s market value can only be described as utterly dense. We’ve got third-degree burns to show for it…

    What seems so odd to me is how contradictory the behavior has been. It seems like Clark is doing all he can to stay in Seattle. I get that he has unnatural leverage due to externalities with other contracts, but part of that leverage is the threat you will walk next year. Clark playing on the tag this year isn’t a possibility. But the tendency in that case should be Clark trying everything he can TO play on the tag. Financially that makes all the sense in the world for him.

    I think the only logical conclusion left to come to is that when the Seahawks gambled on not locking up Clark, they did so knowing if he blew up and made them regret it, that they would basically have to trade him. With their lack of draft picks, it makes worlds of sense — in a ‘Belicheckian’ sense anyway. So now I think negotiations may be in a place where the Seahawks will trade Clark unless they get a bargain on him. If that’s been your play all along, then it killed a few leverage birds with one stone; and explains why Clark’s camp is playing the ‘wanting to be in Seattle’ card.

    I gotta say; this is the kind of ruthlessness I’ve wanted to see from our FO for a while. They’ve blinked in games of chicken and gotten burned a few times. I hate that malcontents of yesteryear had to bring us to this place only for the axe to fall on Clark — but the world is an imperfect place. Clark not signing the tag is an attempt to tarnish his trade value. I don’t think anyone is buying it. The causal fan who knows about a DV may not know it, but GM’s know he’s a boon to any locker room and isn’t any kind of malcontent. They also know if he is traded that he will sign a regular deal at market value if he is on a team with regular leverage.

    I still maintain the deadline for locking up or trading Clark is the day of the draft. In fact this only serves to make make me believe it more. Every ounce of leverage Seattle has — as well as basically every ability to avert a horrific disaster — ends that day. That’s why I never thought he would be tagged in the first place. I guess unusual circumstances come with unusual negotiating tactics. Don’t lose heart though! If this was the play all along, it means Clark is likely worth max value. I see a lot of people saying throw in the towel and ship him for a 2nd. I’m sure lost in the fray is that there is an emergency fallback number that the team can pull if the plan flops. I’m sure it is North of $20M — but that’s a risk worth taking to try to mitigate all these circumstances. There’s no such thing as zero risk.

    • Sea Mode says:

      IDK, I sure thought the FO went a pretty long time without blinking with Earl, Sherm, Kam, and got burned for it. So did all that serve to pursuade people now that we really mean to stick to what we say in negotiations? If Clark tells us anything, it’s absolutely not.

      So now Clark will hold out until they cave, and if they try to trade him for good compensation, other teams will low-ball us knowing that we are desperate. Stuck between a rock and a hard place.

      I wonder how much of all of this goes all the way back to Lynch and the example he set in getting what he wanted from our FO. Doesn’t help either that AB just showed the world how to punk a team and get exactly what you want.

      • King_Rajesh says:

        “I wonder how much of all of this goes all the way back to Lynch and the example he set in getting what he wanted from our FO.”

        All of it. Lynch was the start of the malignant cancer that metastasised into Sherman, Earl, Kam and other malcontents. If we didn’t fold for Lynch and forced him back into line or traded him away at the first sign of issue, I don’t think Kam holds out, Sherman takes shots at the coaching staff or writes articles about how Russell sucks, and I think Earl sticks around and doesn’t hold out.

        Like Brock Huard says, it all goes back to Lynch.

        • I respectfully don’t agree: Ground zero was Percy Harvin. Lynch was just kind of business as usual in the NFL. I don’t think his actions caused the selfish gene to split in Seattle. What caused it was when we had this incredible team comprised mostly of overlooked guys who had proven the world wrong. There was brotherhood and pride in what they had built. Players took ownership of the team at that time. Then when it was well known money would be short and contracts were coming due, the Seahawks traded a 1st that could have provided cheap quality to leave money for the rest of the players for an expensive malcontent outsider — which virtually assured Tate would be gone, and showed that the team was more interested in marginal improvements and saw the players and their bond as dispensable. From that moment on; trust was broken, and the mood shifted to one of pure business where everyone looked out for themselves.

          • King_Rajesh says:

            I don’t see it that way – everyone was happy that Harvin was coming in when they traded for him. They thought that Harvin could put the team over the top.

            Lynch was the definition of looking out for himself for years. “Im gonna get mine before I get got tho” was his mantra, and Pete let him get his over and over and over again.

            Pete let the patients run the asylum and it backfired, because young players like Sherman and Earl and Kam saw that the front office would cave if you had talent.

        • lil'stink says:

          I don’t think you could be more off base. Sherm, Kam, Earl… those situations would have played out regardless of Marshawn. And Kam was never a malcontent, even when he held out.

          Hindsight 20/20 the team should have done several things differently. But it wouldn’t have changed Sherm being a malcontent, Kam holding out, or Earl running into the Cowboys locker room.

      • I guess blinking may be the wrong descriptor. They intended to trade some guys; they set the market high, teams low-balled, then teams offered market value. The Seahawks didn’t take market value — they stuck with asking for too much. It’s more like they floored it and crashed into a wall; you’re right. This time they seem to be being much more meticulous though. At least I hope that’s the case. If this gets royally mucked up then we should be looking for a new FO. Trading Frank Clark should be simple as pie — and teams should be lining up to trade for him. If they insist on an unreasonable amount only to see him play on the tag or walk; or if they panic and take a 2nd rounder, then there simply isn’t any fix for their inability to manage the talent on a roster.

  16. Dale Roberts says:

    It’s interesting that just before the franchise tag was placed there were rumors that they were close to a deal. As Rob said, the Seahawks have a number and Clarke has a number. If they can’t reach a compromise it’s nobody’s fault, it’s just the way the game is played today. Belichick has shown that virtually no player, save the franchise QB, is worth sacrificing overall team quality so I think the Hawks have to stick to their plan. You have to keep the faith until they give you a reason not to and that’s wins and losses on the field not in player negotiations. If in your mind they mishandle Frank Clarke but still win eleven games next year maybe it’s not PC/PS that are wrong. If Thomas, Chancellor, and Sherman hadn’t gotten injured they all might have played out differently. I suspect if they had traded Thomas for a third round pick you all would have been screaming that we got screwed. I’ll keep saying it… I don’t know how you could have hoped for a better era of Seahawk football than we’ve had under PC. Enjoy the ride for as long as he wants to be here.

    • drewdawg11 says:

      I think this is all an overreaction and that a deal will get done. I really think that this is how the game is played, and stressing out about it is a waste of energy. I’ll say it again tnat I agree that JS has a bad history of getting worked in trades, (Duane Brown deal and allowing them to hold out for a second rounder). Still, they aren’t idiots either. Frank will sign a long-term desk with Seattle and then we can all worry about the next player.

  17. Burner says:

    Just pay the man, he’s earned it.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Just my opinion — but ‘just pay the man’ is the worst saying in sports.

      What if Clark is asking for Khalil Mack’s $23m a year? Do we ‘just pay the man’ then? And if we do, is Bobby Wagner going to ask for the same? Do we just pay him too because he is the best player on the defense.

      And then when Jarran Reed asks for $20m, do we pay him too? Because he’s earned it.

      What if Wilson asks for $40m a year? He earned it, after all.

      ‘Just paying the man’ is not possible in a league with a salary cap.

      • Burner says:

        I’m assuming his contract demands aren’t OTT because I’ve heard nothing to suggest that. I’m sure if he was wanting silly money it would be in the public domain by now.

        We need to get him extended and stop playing this silly cat and mouse game. As you have pointed out so frequently Rob, we have more contractual headaches coming down the line, this needs to be sorted.

        Frank deserves to be given a top contract so get it done.

        • Rob Staton says:

          But we don’t know what his demands are. There’s every chance his demands are unreasonable. Because if he’s content playing on a $17m tag for one season — he knows in 12 months he can make the open market where he’ll really cash in.

          So I have no problem with ‘not paying him’. The problem I have is not getting anything in return when these players move on. Sometimes you have to churn. If Frank is too expensive, move on. Get the best deal you can.

      • King_Rajesh says:

        “What if Wilson asks for $40m a year? He earned it, after all.”

        I’d still pay it. This team had never had elite talent at QB in its entire history and I don’t want to watch us try to find another QB – Pete and John brought in Matt Flynn to start for crying out loud, and he was terrible. According to PFR, there are only THREE more players in the history of this franchise that have more AV than Russell Wilson, and all are hall of fame players – and if Russell has another 14+ AV year next year, he’ll be second only to Largent, who he’ll surpass the year after.

        Largent played for 13 years, Big Walt and Tez Kennedy for 10. Russell will surpass them all by YEAR NINE.

        Pay Russell whatever he wants.

        • Troy says:

          No one can ever question your love affair with Wilson lol. A team who pays 40 million to a QB (under current salary cap) would NEVER win a super bowl. That is such a fat % of the cap that you would be hamstringing every other single deal, no thanks!

        • Snax says:

          Disagree for so many reasons. Sure he’s the best QB we’ve had, but what’s the point in owning a top QB (who’s aging and will regress sooner than later) if the rest of the roster can’t be properly filled out and balanced?

          You’re coming from looking at our past struggles, when you should be thinking of the potential delemas ahead.

      • Troy says:

        THANK YOU!!! I never knew I needed a Rob Staton rant about this saying but it felt amazing to read, I feel the exact same as you. People who say “just pay the man” really have no idea how important the cap is and how hard it is to run a team…every single contract paid has a ripple effect on each and every other contract. The shit is fascinating to think about honestly (I tend to geek out on salary cap stuff), so thanks for writing this out, it echoes my thoughts completely.

    • HawksBill says:

      Sure keep “paying the man”, he will probably prove his worth. With a cap crippled offense and defense he will have plenty of defensive snaps to prove it.

  18. Rob Staton says:

    A further thought on this Frank Clark situation…

    I’d definitely, without a doubt, consider a deal that involved picks in the rounds 2-4 range and a swap of first rounders. So if Green Bay wanted Clark, swap 12 for 21 and get some mid-round compensation. If it’s Buffalo, 21 for 9. If it’s Detroit — 21 for 8.

    Fill out your draft board in the middle rounds ahead of this deep draft and get into range where you can either get a stud or trade back and get even more picks.

    And if it’s Oakland — I’d happily take 24.

    The only problem is — I’m not sure teams are going to offer these types of deals.

    • Jared Marshall says:

      That sounds roughly fair to me. I think it’s a little light, but I also think we’re in an unideal situation that makes asking top dollar tough to do without a bidding war (which I still haven’t discounted as a possibility). This isn’t like with Mack where the franchise tag wasn’t a big deal if he doesn’t pull a Bell. It’s hard to call that a botch — and simply not botching would make me feel pretty damn good right now.

    • kevin mullen says:

      So, say we do a deal with OAK for their 24, I’d assume we would immediately want their 35th pick, could you see us packaging those two and move up in the draft? Draft value would be 1190, pushing us to #12 or #13. You see a scenario that we would move up for someone specific?

      • DCD2 says:

        I think he’s saying Clark for #24 straight up. Giving us 21 & 24… I don’t think we’d be moving up in that scenario.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        Not likely. If SEA trade Clark for some team’s R1 pick, they’d almost certainly trade down from that. However, if that happened, they might make a selection with their native R1 pick (if it wasn’t part of the Clark trade).

    • lil'stink says:

      I still think if Clark isn’t playing for us in September it will be with the Colts (assuming they don’t land a big edge rusher in FA).

      The Colts have 2 second round picks and could see Clark as a guy to get them over the top.

  19. diehard82 says:

    I actually find the negotiations interesting and entertaining. And I’ll come right out and say that I think getting even a high 2nd round pick for Clark now is perfectly reasonable. We spent a 2nd, got 4 years of service at under market value, and ultimately get our 2nd back to spend on another prospect. If they can sign him to a reasonable deal and keep him, escellent. If not, get the pick back to use again. Remember, any team trading for him not only gives up draft pick(s) but must absorb the huge cap hit.

    What is reasonable? Sacks aren’t the whole story. PFF has him ranked 18th among edge defenders, which includes pass rush, run defense and coverage grades combined. For pass rush alone, he is also 18th. And per PFF he has been consistent over his 4 years of play, sack numbers not withstanding. Unlike Shaquille Griffin, but that’s another story.

    The 18th highest paid (cap number, not cash outlay) edge rusher in 2018 per OverTheCap.com was 10.4M/yr. To be fair, Frank is only 26 and entering his prime. The team cap keeps increasing every year as well. So how much is he really worth? Certainly he hasn’t earned the right to be the top paid edge rusher. He is no Khalil Mack. And just because Chicago paid Mack 23.5M (and gave up all those picks, ouch) doesn’t mean every other good edge defender deserves that much, or every other team should spend that much. What about 9th? That seems really generous at 15M. Not enough, OK, what about 5th? Super generous, top 5 money for a guy who hasn’t been anywhere near the top 5 in performance yet, but could be. Not coincidentally that is 17M. Therefore, $17M per year for 5 yrs with 3 yrs guaranteed seems more than reasonable, in fact very generous. If he wants to hold out for more money, don’t waste any more time, trade him before the draft for a late 1st or early 2nd round pick and move on to negotiations with Wilson, Wagner and Reed.

    There is great value in having him on the team, even at 17M/yr. Make no mistake that is the outcome I would prefer, but there is also great value in the draft pick and 17M more cap space to spend on other key players. As has been noted, we can’t keep everyone. It will be interesting to find out what they have offered him.

    • Jared Marshall says:

      I’m pretty sure the Colts would have already jumped on that if it were the price. I think you pay Clark’s bloated asking price and move somebody else instead of taking that deal. The combination of age, health, and premium nature of the position means his value only goes up after locking him up. We would lose some from the signing bonus by trading him after backing up the truck — but the extra draft compensation while saving most of what you pay him would likely be a good use of that dead cap space overall.

    • dj 1/2 way says:

      I am going to call that the best comment so far. I had no idea he ranked so low. Where does Reed Rank? How can you enjoy this? It is killing me!

      If we can trade him then does that help with future negotiations? Nearly everybody who has left seems to regret it. Maybe Golden Tate and Max Unger are exceptions, and clearly mistakes by the FO.

      Rob has it right, as usual. We need the draft picks and flexiblity next year. Further, these players can conspire to not sign and put the pressure on for over market contracts. The injury risk is high, and as Kam showed here and Gurley shows for the Rams, injuries with top payed players can really hurt.

      We all really enjoyed the team success last year, but maybe they should have avoided all the free agent deals that cost them the compesation picks. They will be tempted again this year to fill some holes that way. Depending on a few factors, maybe they should keep those compesation picks intact this year and rely on players who are cut and UDFAs to fill out the depth.

      With a thin roster things can still go well with few injuries, but as we see every year, the perforance in the playoffs is dependent on injuries and depth. I think we can count on improvements in a number of young players, but the Seahawks will not be great next year without a big dose of good luck.

      • diehard82 says:

        Thanks, I really do enjoy the entire free agency and draft process. I confess that i don’t know exactly how PFF arrives at their grades, though they do claim to watch every play for every player to evaluate, and I don’t see any better resource out there accessible to me. Jarran Reed, despite the 10.5 sacks, is ranked 68th overall among interior lineman. 75th against the run and 34th pass rush. He has improved each year. And he is still approaching his prime years, so things look promising. But he’s also a FA this time next year, so they should be extending him now along with Wilson and Wagner if they can. Or trading him for a 1st or 2nd round pick if they can’t re-sign him.

        Poona Ford didn’t get ranked due to limited snaps, but he was averaging about half the defensive snaps by the last 4 games and graded out 10th for run D and 13th overall. That’s with 265 total snaps compared to 823 for Reed. I suspect Poona will be seeing much more action this year. Shamar Stephen was 98th and Quinton Jefferson 100th overall.

  20. Coleslaw says:

    Man… I’ve always said that Amari Cooper is the best pure #2 receiver in the league, and the Raiders could have had him and Antonio Brown. And Khalil Mack. Carr and Coopers connection would have been highlighted by single coverage, while AB would have been doing his thing as well. They could have signed Leveon Bell still and had at least a top 10 pick.

    The Raiders did load up for the next couple draft too, though so I feel like that’s where the value is in all these moves. They can replace Mack and Cooper, and still gain multiple high draft picks in the process. Gruden is gonna get another Super Bowl. Mark my words.

    • Dale Roberts says:

      The league is currently set up to reward teams with high level performers on rookie deals so yeah, Gruden might find the sweet spot. That said I’m not sure if Derek Carr is the man and Gruden is more offense than defense. It also depends on Mike Mayock’s ability to translate from pundit to prove-it.

    • charlietheunicorn says:

      Cooper was not preforming while in Oakland, for whatever reason. He also would be owed “big money” sooner rather than later. Could they have kept all these guys, sure… perhaps, but then they would not be able to fill out the roster. Like him or not, Gruden has a very defined player he wants on the team and Mack / Cooper didn’t fit.

      As Dale mentioned, the league is set-up to reward the rookie deal (for skill players) teams….. and the only team that somewhat bucks the trend is the Patriots…. but they also load up on the 2nd/3rd year players for depth.

      It will be very interesting to see who Mayock has faith in drafting this year. They still have PLENTY of draft ammo, with the 3x 1st round picks.

  21. charlietheunicorn says:

    As the NFL turns….

    “The Kansas City Chiefs released four-time Pro Bowl linebacker Justin Houston on Sunday.”

    … might be worth kicking to tires on him.

    • Aaron says:

      If Houston is willing to sign for about 10 mil a year on a one or three year deal then I’d take a whack at it, otherwise no. I’d rather see the Hawks pull off a trade for a 3rd or 4th rounder than get a guy who is likely to be too costly. I don’t doubt but that he’ll get over 15 a year for his services.

  22. Nathan W. says:

    Trading Frank Clark would be a huge blow, but if we got the draft haul suggested, I think I would trust PC/JS to develop them and come out on top. We could get Anthony Barr / Houston on a one-two year deal. Perhaps we would be in range for Clelin Ferrel or one of the top two linebackers plus we would have the draft capital to spend on a developmental DT like Wren or Saunders a little bit earlier than we would have previously…

    Either way, we could make it work. Frank + someone like Omenihu would be great as well. My thoughts would be that trading Frank would allow us more flexibility with other FA signings in the next couple of years, as well as the potential for getting some premium blue chip talent in on the DL that we otherwise would not be in range to acquire. Two good options. I vote for more flexibility.

    Very interesting developments…

  23. Kenny Sloth says:

    Oh shit; NFL silly season is Herrre

  24. Josh says:

    I think pay him his market value. If he wants ridiculous money let another team pay him and get your 3rd round comp pick. That’s exactly why that system is there.

    • GerryG says:

      1) what if market value is overrated? The last two guys to set the market were once in a generation talents who are mvps.
      2) what if market value skews the cap the cap wrong way for the rest of the team?
      3) A third round comp is awful compensation and is delayed a year. If you’re going to lose him, get value this spring in the draft

    • HawksBill says:

      You only get the comp pick if you lose more free agents than FA you sign. See 2018

  25. BobbyK says:

    Players try screwing teams over all the time. Teams try screwing players all the time. The owners love having a salary cap so they can guarantee their profits and claim “woe is me” when they can’t give players more “because of the salary cap.” I just hate the drama that comes with it.

    I’m not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I’m thinking Clark could explode next year. Remember training camp where he had problems with both wrists (more than minor injuries). If properly healthy, he could really be a beast and up his game. I’ve also been a proponent of “keeping your own” core type of guys. You don’t draft players so they can turn out great only to let them walk. I’m still bitter about Steve Hutchinson.

    On the other side, if Frank wants big time money (close to Mack and Donald), you can’t do that either. Seems silly to pay him so much more than Wagner is going to get due to the positions they play. Do they trust Frank once he’s been paid? So many things to think about.

    All I know is that if they do trade Clark, they need to hit a home run with the pick they get for him. If Wilson is going to be making almost $40 million soon – then you need that core group of young talent on those cheap rookie contracts.

  26. Barry says:

    Pretty hot topic. I’m all for keeping our players and even paying them when we can.

    But one thing very recently, the Earl issue. Frank was a second round pick. We don’t need a first and in this draft the QB’s (which in my opinion are all 2nd to 3rd round picks, except one, and I do like most of them) will be moved into the first round. There will be a few WRs over drafted and most likely a LT or two.

    We could find great value at the end of round one into round two in this draft and there is a lot of data provided by winning teams that show this.

    Don’t overthink things, if we get a good offer I think we should take it. This could also be after the draft when Frank is sitting out, or before the trade deadline.

  27. C-Dog says:

    Lots of thoughts on the Frank Clark matter. Thought I’d throw in my two cents.

    For me as a life long, diehard, Seattle Seahawks fan, I would love nothing more than to see Seattle sign Frank Clark long term. I think Frank still has a lot of upside to his game. I think he was raw doing out of Michigan and it showed in his rookie year. He has done nothing but get better each following year, and when you match his work ethic with his freakish explosive traits of speed and power, I think Frank Clark is destined to make a lot of money in this league and can become on bonafide star. He has that potential.

    That said, all things concerned, this is Frank’s time. He is still in his mid twenties, and the next four years or more are prime for him. This is his time to make as much money as he possibly can. This is his time to ask for as much money as he can, and with the league seeing what Mack did for the lowly Chicago Bears, he and his agent can point to that to a degree. If I was his daddy (maybe he rest in peace) I would tell that boy to go get as much as you can now, and be ruthless because that league will dump on you once you start slowing down. Do not give Seattle or any other team a discount. Considering where you came from, homeless as a child, you get all you can possibly get, and you set your children and future generations up for life.

    Now, if I were John Schneider and or Pete Carroll, that’s a whole other beast. I got a top five quarterback who is looking at becoming the richest player in the game, I have the best middle linebacker in football who won;t be cheap, and I have a young DT was has suddenly blossomed into the NFL equivalent of a white rhino as a pass rushing three down player. It’s going to be incredibly challenging keeping all four without Clark stubbornly asking for well beyond what we can manage.

    So, as JS/PC, I’m stuck with three choices.

    1. I go beyond what we can reasonably offer, sign Clark to what his price tag says and likely risk loosing Wagner and Reed the following year.

    2. I can look to trade Clark to see what I can get, and try to determine how that weighs in fielding a competitive roster for 2019.

    3. I can also let Clark play out his deal in 2019 and see him walk away and receive a likely R3 comp in 2021.

    On the surface, the third option seems by far the least appealing, and surely I’d probably be well aware it would annoy a large faction of fans. However, say Justin Houston comes calling, and says that he wants a shot at a title and thinks Seattle would be a great fit, and is willing to come in on a one year rental bargain. Maybe Henry Anderson says and does the same thing. Now I start thinking about what my front four rotation looks like with Clark, Houston, Reed, Anderson, Poona, Morgan and Green, and possibly one of these many talented Dliners in the draft. Now, I’m thinking to myself, “self, we were pretty close to beating the Rams in those losses. Maybe we keep Clark as a $17 mill rental, and see what comes out of this.”

    I think that it is entirely possible that Seattle chooses option three.

    Seattle has a price that it is willing to spend on Clark, and they think it is fair, and on principal, they don’t want to budge much off it. Clark has his price, and thinks it’s now time to ask for it (YOLO). Seattle asking price might be a first round pick, and change, and some team offers a second round pick, and JS/PC refuse it thinking that that second rounder isn’t going to help them over take the Rams in 2019, and isn’t going to be near as good of a player in 2019 as Frank Clark.

    Not saying that this is how it will go down, but I will say, as Rob has been prepping folks for the possible drafting of a QB with a high round pick, I think it’s entirely possible that this is how it’s going to play out with Frank and the team, and we should brace for that. As many have already exhaustingly mentioned with Earl, and Sherm, and such, the team has a track record of this.

    Personally, I don’t think Pete Carroll thinks that far down the line. I think he is the type to be hyper focused on the team he has staring at him now, and he doesn’t want to let go of a star player that can help his team win in the present. He likely believes that they can win it all each year, and I don’t think he is the type to mortgage the present for the future. Schneider might be fine dealing certain costly players for picks but let’s remember, he might have been fine dealing Thomas for a second round pick last Fall, but Carroll has final say. Folks can rag all they want on Schneider, but he doesn’t do anything without Carroll signing off on it.

    Hopefully, they get a deal done with Frank. If not, hopefully they can find a team that would offer a fair deal that would entice them to move on from him. If not that, hopefully they make a serious run in 2019. At the end of the day, it’s really is all about hope.

    That’s why we follow these guys, right?

    • Kyle says:

      That’s a good point. Pete has final say on these things. I think he’s willing to listen to Schneider on a lot but when it comes to keeping his guys he sees himself as a player’s coach. And unless a guy really crosses the line, like Bennett and Sherm finally did at the end, he wants to keep them around. And frankly while Pete is a great coach in some areas in tactics he often comes up short. (Like game clock management.) I’m pretty sure Frank won’t be dealt

  28. schuemansky says:

    This offseason seems to get worse every day.

    First we start out with only 4 picks. Then Rob gives us a reality check on our cap and QB situation, and now … it seems that Frank Clark isn’t all-in on the Seahawks either.

    Actually my impression (or let’s call it hope) is that RW and FC would sign for market rate contracts (maybe 35 and 17 mil). My doubts are lying mor on PCJS’s willingness to do the same.

    So for my peace of mind:

    Let’s start with trading Frank Clark to the Colts for their 34 and Jacoby Brissett.

    Then let’s talk with RW’s agent and make him an offer to consider within a week before the draft.

    If a deal get’s done fine, otherwise trade RW to to Giants for their R1 picks in 2019 and ’20 and another R4 in 2019 and R3 in 2020. Not a good deal but I am not sure PCJS are able to make better ones.

    For this and the next draft we are awash with draft capital, we are able to pay whomever we want to pay … and we probably will pick in the top 10 next year … “always compete” will have to wait for one year only I hope.

    • Aaron says:

      I wouldn’t get too down about the situation right now. There’s a lot of posturing and throwing weight around, it’s all part of the process of business. While there are four key free agents after 2019 (Wilson, Wagner, Clark, and Reed) I honestly believe all four will be retained in some form or fashion. PC and JS know how to play this and so do the players and their agents. None of these four are disgruntled at the organization (like AB was in Pittsburgh) or causing a rift in the locker room for various reasons (Bennett, Sherman, Earl). These four are OKGs and until we hear otherwise they are going to remain as such in my mind. The negotiations will be tough but I don’t feel any bridges will be burned down like it was with the previous core. They couldn’t get over 2nd down and goal from the 1 and their lost shot at immortality. This new core wasn’t here then or has moved on.

  29. Georgia Hawk says:

    Man, tons of lamenting and throwing in the towel around here already. All you see up and down this board is: “should’ve signed him last year,” “Just pay him what he wants,” and “PC/JS lowball and drive everybody off.”

    Couple of points here:
    1. We are seeing an entirely new version of the NFL the last couple years. Premier players are willing to sit out an entire and/or play out the tags. Players have an open platform to express whatever they want on social media that largely didnt exist 10 years ago. The negotiation process is completely changed and we are just now seeing the new normal.

    2. Until last year we had never seen Clark operate as the sole and primary pass rush threat. He had always been paired with MB and/r Avril. Signing him last year to an extension without knowing if he could shoulder the load by himself would, IMO, been horribly premature. He could easily have bombed out and been a JAG by this time.

    3. We don’t know what he wants, numbers haven’t been released. What if he is asking 23-25/yr? Are you wiling to do that? Wilson will get 30+ and Frack on 20+ and now you’v got 1/4 of your cap tied to two players long term with huge guarantees. Are we really willing to do that?

    4. Sure PC/JS have developed a reputation for lowballing, but can we honestly say that they’ve been wrong yet? Sherman played well, but was he worth the money he was asking? Bennet was so good he was just traded again. Lang was good enough on his deal that he just got released. We don’t know how Earl will play out yet. he could easily come back and be the HOF guy he has been, or just as easily fall off the proverbial cliff.

    I’m not exactly keen on the way the off season has gone so far myself, but I’m far from ready to light it all on fire. There are huge decisions to make going into the next few years…franchise altering type decisions. I’m willing to take our time and see how it play out before passing judgement.

    Also, lets remember the usual order of events. Extensions don’t usually get handed out until the summer. I’m wiling to put money on a Clark extension coming around then after the dust has settled on all the other free agents. This isn’t the same situation as Earl, not even close.

  30. Sea Mode says:

    Joel Corry
    @corryjoel

    Frank Clark saying he won’t go to training camp without a new deal isn’t a unique stance for franchise players. Missing part or all of the preseason after the 7/15 long term deadline passes is a pretty common occurrence. Besides Le’Veon Bell, the tender is eventually signed.

    11:23 PM · Mar 10, 2019

  31. Largent80 says:

    Whomever has the money …..”Come and Get Me” should be taken up immediately. Get this clown outta here.

  32. Kenny Sloth says:

    John Schneider basically sucks a$$.

    He’s a terrible GM. Bad at trades, constantly getting fleeced. So bad at contract negotiations.

    Can we trade John Schneider and get a real GM like Howie Rosemann tha Godd??

    /s

    • Kenny Sloth says:

      John Schneider is the Enemy of the People, folks. 👌 👌

      • John says:

        Howie Roseman better the John Schneider the reasons everyone on the team is taking pay cuts and increasing the cap space is because they still believe they’re super bowl contenders, same thing happened with the hawks after they won the SB if I remember correctly Russell and Doug Baldwin took pay cuts

  33. GoHawksDani says:

    I think all the cards are in Clark’s hand:

    Options:
    1, He doesn’t sign, the Hawks don’t have him, and he walks in FA
    2, He signs the tag, but next year he’ll be UFA along with BWagz, Wilson, Reed
    3, He signs a long term deal

    He’ll get big money either way

    I just don’t get. What does he possibly want?
    25 mil APY? Fully guaranteed?

    If Schneider doesn’t give him at least 19-20 mil APY he’s a fool. Clark won’t sign anything under 19 mil.
    Mack’s contract: 6 years, 141 mil (23,5 mil APY), 90 GTD (63%)
    If Clark wants anything over 22,5 mil APY and 60% GTD he’s a fool.
    Let’s meet halfway and give an extension like:
    4, 5 or 6 years. 21,5-22 mil APY, 60% GTD and call it a day. It could be like:
    (yearly salary/gtd) 17/17, 22/16, 23/16, 24/11, 23/6

    • Rob Staton says:

      And Clark’s definitely worth that?

      Because you better be sure if you’re paying him $19-20m a year plus.

      • GoHawksDani says:

        No but this is the market for a quality passrusher nowadays.

        IF we can get a top15 pick for him (at least), we could roll the dice with a rookie with potential. But the rookie could be a bust.

        In my mind this is an equation:

        the potential of Clark as a pass rusher talent + Clark as a leader + the experience of Clark = x

        ( ~16 million CAP space value for the team + potential of a rookie top 15 pick + value for optional additional picks for a trade) – how much the team would miss Clark’s production = y

        Which one is greater x or y?

        Also, there is some question about locker room mood and general judgement if you don’t re-sign a guy who is in a great age, had shown some enthusiasm for the team via social media, did nothing wrong, had an awesome season, shown signs of getting better every year, etc.

        If you don’t re-sign him, who’ll you re-sign?
        If you don’t re-sign him, and you’re a guy with a prove it contract or rookie contract how will you see the team? Will you be here if your cheaper contract is up?
        If you’re a UFA would you want to be here if you know that you won’t get much?
        If you won’t willing to pay much the better talent won’t wanna play here, if they don’t wanna play here that could be a good route to mediocrity.

        A trade/no long term contract could imply a lot of things about this team. Some positives but also a lot of negatives. I think this could be a much riskier move than to part ways with Bennett, Sherm, ETIII

        I think Clark can be a really-really good rusher, probably even top3, top5 in the league.
        He’s CURRENTLY the 3rd best and the most important guy in this team (Russ, Bobby and him. I think Douggie is more talented, but also older, and I have some injury concerns about him. Carson could be tied for 3rd place but the RB position is pretty de-valued in this day and age. I think Reed might be a better talent and more of a game-wrecker, but he had a couple of quiet years and only 1 really great year…we’ll see. I think McDougald is really important, but it’s more about his exp, wisdom, game knowledge, versatility than about his talent. Lockett is also a key piece, but while we pass ~45% maybe and Russ will target Lockett ~22% of the offensive plays, Clarks plays I guess 90+ percent on defense and he always need to rush the passer or set the edge against the run).

        For me it depends on:
        1, the floor for Clark’s demands. If he wants at least 23 mil, then it’s a no go
        2, How much could we get for him?
        If we can get at least a top 15 pick in this draft and either a next year’s first round and some change OR something along the line of this year’s 2nd, 4th, 5th then I’d think about it.

        So something like: Clark wants 22 million APY and we could get the 18th pick and a third, 5th, 6th and 7th in this year would be the hardest scenario for me. The demand is a bit too much and the trade reward would be a bit too little

Leave a Reply