We received this anonymous tip a few weeks ago and it has been stirring around at Footblog HQ ever since. It's unverified, but who cares? It actually makes sense if you think about it.
Seattle is living on borrowed time, essentially a wide receiving corps on a 1-year lease. That's what happens when a front office loses their minds and their business sense and allows football management to get personal. Seattle brass never imagined they would lose Hutchinson, and it took a pretty shady deal to rip Hutchinson from Seattle's grasp but the Vikings managed to pull it off. Everyone at Seahawk HQ blew a gasket. In fit and rage their retribution for this contractual robbery was in the form of overpaying for the services of Vikings starting wide receiver Nate Burleson.
Nate Burleson coming aboard with a big money contract was hardly music to D-Jack's ears, but he was too busy rehabbing that knee to say much about it. And then, came Deion Branch.
Deion Branch was an opportunity that Seattle would've pounced on no matter the Burleson mistake had been made or not. The opportunity to 'plug and play' a veteran who can score points on the field and in the locker room was too good to pass up for a Seattle team clearly searching for their Super Bowl rabbit's foot.
So the acquisition dust finally settles in Seattle after acquiring Burleson and Branch, the regular season's in full swing, but the new reality for Darrell Jackson was also starting to sink in. The unquestioned #1 wide receiver on the team, had fallen to #3 on the salary depth chart. Jackson politely grumbled about it for a few days, and then subsequently dropped the issue entirely for two reasons. First, you have to know Darrell Jackson. He's a 'Sunday guy', a true competitor who wants to win. Grumbling about his contract in-season when nothing of value can be accomplished beyond making headlines and being a team distraction is not Darrell Jackson's style. Second, Darrell Jackson knows his time will come. Darrell Jackson knows Seattle has to pay the piper. In this case, Seattle made a costly management decision when they signed Nate Burleson and they haven't paid for that mistake yet. But the 1-year lease comes due in 2007 and Darrell Jackson knows it.
Enter San Diego. A talented team with a talented young quarterback who is proving more than capable of being a quality NFL passer. 
To further his development and tap into his potential the Chargers must add a #1-quality target for Rivers to throw to outside of Antonio Gates. Someone to stretch the field, which accomplishes two things, opens up the middle of the field for Gates and gives Rivers a big-play weapon. They need it, and they either draft it which means grooming and growing pains, or acquire one with experience who can step in right away and make a difference.
At some point this offseason the Seattle piper will come calling. The Steve Hutchinson casualty will be known and a price will need to be paid. Why would Darrell Jackson tolerate #3 money on a team when everybody knows if he's wearing a Seattle uniform, he's their #1 go-to guy? He won't. Jackson shows up in Kirkland this offseason demanding his contract be renegotiated and he be paid #1 money. Seattle either dumps Burleson and faces a sizable cap hit, or they must come to grips with the fact that they can't pay three wide receivers #1 money. Doesn't compute. Darrell Jackson says pay me or trade me. San Diego waits in the wings and gives Seattle an offer that helps ease their pain. The piper gets paid.
Sound familiar?
Think Deion Branch.
Image Credit: [Getty Images]
Recent Entries:
· Grant enters not guilty plea
· Davis apologizes for missing practice
· Can Indy finally grab Super Bowl?
Pats fan here.I agree that San Diego would be the right fit, but the Pats got a #1 for Branch, which sets the bar, and obviously Jackson being the #1 wr on Branch's new team, means he is worth a #1 on the market now too. I don't see San Diego, after all their drafting success trading a #1 pick.
Also, if more homework had been done the writer would know that Burleson is the 3rd highest paid wr on that team (behind Branch and Jackson). Now, I'm not a football writer but I'm pretty sure that the 7/49 given to Burleson was an FU to Minny and is backloaded and is really a 3/18 (still alot for #4 behind Jackson,Branch and Hackett). I see Jackson,Branch,Hackett and Burleson as that teams wr core next year, but I wouldn't be suprised if Burleson was cut or renogotiated after yr 3. But I would see Seattle taking a 1st for Jackson, because Hackett would be #2 wr on most teams - but San Diego isn't a team that would/should trade a 1st rounder for a #1 wr.
A better story would be about how Hackett is a UFA and the Bolts are gonna steal a star (and Rivers new,longtime #1 wr)from the Hawks if they don't tender him high enough. DJ is a Cali boy and would love to be a #1 wr in his home state.
I assume your a Seahawk fan and probably now the FA situation of that team better than I. But what is the point of being an ERFA? if you can't sign with another team (even for leverage) wouldn't the current team just give the guy the minimum?
^^^ Pats Fan: was ERFA made by the Pats so they can keep lowballing their guys and leave Brady without any wrs?
I take that back, Hackett is an RFA because he's been in the league 3 years, the list I was looking at was wrong. The ERFA status is there to benefit the teams, not the players...it's just something the NFLPA had to compromise to get something else they wanted when negotiating the collective bargaining agreement.
But anyway, the highest tender for RFA's is only like 1.5 million, which I'm sure the Seahawks will give him. Meaning if you want him, prepare to part with a 1st round pick.
Yah that was pretty much a waste of the 2 minutes it took to read. The internet has really become nothing more than a source of slander and rumor mongering. Do some research before writing would you please.
You really should do some research prior to writing. Burleson will never see the full amount of the 49 million. It has 4 years and 13.5 million guaranteed. He will renegotiate and the end of 4 years or get cut. All the 7/49 meant was a dig on the dirty deed the the Vikings pulled with Hutch.
Get a clue. Nate Burleson's contract is worth 13.5 million in the first 4 years. 35.5 million in the last 3, he will never see the last 3 years of this deal. Put unless SD is willing to give up a 1, 4 and Gates.......
ooppps sorry looks like every other 'smart' person beat me to the $$$ part.
This makes sense, but also doesn't. Why does nobody understand that Nate Burleson's 7 year, 49 million dollar deal isn't guaranteed. It's essentially a 4 year, like 14 million dollar deal. the other 24 million is in the last 3 years of the deal where it is known, when it comes to that point, they will negotiate. They only made it that high because it was the same number off the Vikes gave Hutch. Get a clue. It's sorry that these writers can write about things that they aren't even knowledgable about. Maybe D-Jack gets traded...who knows...but this article is bologna.
BHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Talk about getting put in your place.
The guy who wrote this should be placed on probation from making up riduclous web rumors for messing this one up so bad.
What do you want to be this guy gets an offer to write for espn.com?
Hilarious.
Clearly, if the Seahawks are going anywhere for a while ... it has to be this year....
Phil Ayres
Fantasy Football
ABOUT
Footblog.com
is a fantasy football blog authored by self-admitted fantasy football junkies.
EDITORS
Tim Gossett
LeRon S.
Evian C.
send wdis questions
contact Footblog
click here.
Share your wisdom
blog on Footblog
SYNDICATION
All feeds: click here.
DAILYPIXEL NETWORK
2010Vancouver.ca
Airport.ca
Archive.ca
BallPimp.ca
CityGuide.ca/CALGARY
Canuck.ca
Dailypixel.ca
Dial.ca
Engagements.ca
FluPandemic.ca
Footblog.ca
Forks.ca
Gadget.ca
Gimme.ca
Greetings.ca
Hell.ca
Hugg.ca
CityGuide.ca/KELOWNA
Lease.ca
Meme.ca
Naturopath.ca
PrimeMinister.ca
Profit.ca
RRSPS.ca
SearchEngine.ca
Stare.ca
Stylish.ca
Superwoman.ca
CityGuide.ca/TORONTO
Video.ca
VirtualReality.ca
Wager.ca
TAGS
Tag Cloud
DATE-BASED
May 2008 (10)
April 2008 (40)
March 2008 (29)
February 2008 (30)
January 2008 (27)
December 2007 (23)
November 2007 (26)
October 2007 (18)
September 2007 (18)
August 2007 (27)
July 2007 (13)
June 2007 (5)
May 2007 (1)
April 2007 (27)
March 2007 (11)
January 2007 (1)
November 2006 (2)
October 2006 (6)
September 2006 (10)
December 2005 (1)
November 2005 (4)
October 2005 (9)
February 2005 (5)
January 2005 (10)
December 2004 (2)
November 2004 (9)
October 2004 (22)
September 2004 (9)
July 2004 (25)
June 2004 (13)
SEARCH
1
Maybe you should learn how NFL contracts work, and do some reasearch, before coming up with these wackbrain theories and passing them off as "inside sources."
1st off, Nate Burleson's contract is worth $13.5 million in the first 4 years. The last 3 years is worth $35.5 million, he will NEVER see that $35.5 million money. EVER.
2nd, the Seahawks weretalking to Burleson BEFORE Hutchinson signed with the Vikings, it wasn't a fit of rage signing...but it did give them a good idea, make the total money of the contract $49 million and poison pill the hell out of it.
In conclusion: Leave the reporting to people with actuall inside sources.