Best receiver on the team, who also has a great rapport with Hass. Considering our wide receiver corps and its lack of experience, I think the Hawks may need Engram more than he needs the Hawks. Make sure Bobby is a happy Hawk! He consistently makes the big catches and can be the mentor the young Hawks (Payne, Taylor etc) really need.
We all need to remember that Bobby is stating that he had a great year last year and that is true and we all know it. But, he was the one who went into Holmgren's office and told him when Branch and Hackett were injured that he wanted to do whatever was necessary to win and help out the team. He said it, he wasn't asked to. He could have stayed at the position he was at. Burleson could have moved over to the #1 slot. I love Bobby a lot and even more than Alexander but he needs to understand where the team is at as well. I agree to extend him out one more year but after the Alexander incident there is no way Seattle will give an older player a longer contract.
I bet someone put Bobby up to this. Maybe saying this,"You just go tell them right now that you want more money." I do agree he is worth more this year. Will he be worth more next year? He wants an extension. It's like rollin' the dice. I personally don't think he will play past the 09' season.
With his production though would it be too much of a risk to make the 2010 season leveled at a vet min plus incentive bonuses? For what he's done for the Hawks I don't think that is too much to ask and what we do know is that he just wants to play in 2010. I say give it to him because no matter how you look at it you CANNOT relate this to SA's situation. He's asking for 2 more years and NO pay raise. I bet he'd take a pay cut in 2010 he just wants a roster spot.
dont give in hawks. be strong and stick to your guns. i love bobby on and off the field, but it is a business and it is bad business to give him two years right now. cant wait for all the off season bs to be over and just play some football.
You can argue that Bobby doesn't really deserve more money but when you throw $6m at Branch you lose your leverage. Ruskell went crazy with the Branch deal and has been dealing with the repercussions since (D-Jack, now Bobby). You can't throw money at an unknown quantity then tell guys who have given their heart and soul to the team they aren't worth it.
If all he wants is an extension through 2010, absolutely give it to him. I don't think it's fair to compare his situation to Shaun because there is substantial research to indicate that a RB at Shaun's age, with the number of carries he had the year before, is going to break down. There isn't the same evidence against Bobby, speed is not the key to his game, and he had a career season last year and set a team record. Two more years is not too much to ask in this case and Ruskell should definitely pull the trigger for a guy who has been a key to our team for years.
I hate to disagree, but there is a major hole in your argument.
You are basing your assessment of Branch being overpaid by having access to the results. When Branch signed, he had just had barely under a 1000 yard season and subsequently won the SB MVP.
Yes, he hasn't lived up to the contract, but that is not how the market works. He got that money because that is what the team was willing to pay him. The team thought he would preform better. If they agree with you that the contract was burdensome, they would have released him, like they did Shaun. Teams misjudge how players will perform all the time. They simply make the best decision with the information at hand.
On the other hand, Bobby signed his deal after coming off a season where he played sparingly and only caught 26 balls. Neither the team nor Bobby could have accurately predicted his production last year, which is why they agreed on that price. If either party could have predicted this, at the least there would have been incentives in the contract.
By saying Bobby is worth the money and pay him what he wants, you are essentially buying into same theory that you criticize the team for using with Branch. You want the team to pay Engram for his past results. You are expecting he will continue with similar production, but nobody knows. He is even older than Branch and he has less of a pedigree than Branch did when he signed. Essentially, the signs say he will be less valuable than what it appeared Branch would be. Bobby could just as easily have 3 injury plagued years after signing this deal, just like Branch has had since signing his. In fact, by all indicators, that would be more likely. He is older, has an injury history, and played more snaps last year than he has in previous years.
So what happens when Bobby shows his age. Will you say "take bobby's money and pay Courtney Taylor!"
Why ask the team to compound their mistake with Branch by making a risker move with Bobby? Shouldn't they at least wait until the contract is finished so they have more information. It isn't like Bobby is going to skip games.
The simple fact is that players get what they are worth at the time they sign a contract. If they think they will be worth more before their contract is up, they should sign a shorter deal.
Branch an unknown quantity? Hardly. He was a well known quantity and last season was on a pace to set records for the Seahawks in receiving before he was injured. He was just tearing it up and then his injury took all that away and all of a sudden everyone's down on him like it was his fault he was injured or Ruskell's.
He didn't have a history of injury at NE so where did Ruskell go wrong? Branch was a Super Bowl MVP that Tom Brady was highy praising when he was signed and after the first year in which he didn't go through training camp and therefore didn't know the system very well, he went through training camp, had a great camp, and as I said, was just tearing up the opposition when he was injured. He never played healthy again last season.
If he'd remained healthy, everyone would be singing a different tune today. If Kearney or Peterson or Grant or Russell had been hurt after Ruskell signed them to big long term contracts, everyone would be saying the same things about them being a bust because they're always injured too. Signing any player is a crapshoot with respect to injury whether is a free agent or a draft choice.
Ruskell can't predict who is going to become injured especially when there are no red flags in the players prior service. At the time the Branch deal was made, it made perfect sense because the handwritting was on the wall concerning Jackson and we needed a number 1 receiver which Branch had the potential to be and had shown that talent in NE.
I stand by the Branch deal as a good deal that Ruskell is unfairly being maligned for. All of his trades and player acquisitions aren't going to work out from the stand point of the player staying healthy. Football is just too violent a sport to have any certainty of staying healthy.
Enough said.
I appreciate you guys' points of view but I would argue that Branch's career in New England, Super Bowl MVP notwithstanding, was unspectacular. He never had a 1000 yard season despite being Tom Brady's number 1 target. At the time we gave up a first rounder and signed him to a massive deal, the argument was that Brady spreads the ball around so it's impossible for any one player to put up big numbers. I was not sure about the validity of that claim at the time, and the success of Randy Moss and Wes Welker seem to disprove its logic.
So while Branch may turn out to be an outstanding player for us, and I absolutely hope he does because he seems like a great guy, I am not convinced that there was enough indication that he was going to earn the deal we gave him. It seems to me to be another case of Ruskell wanting to pick his own guys and not having much sympathy for players that were here already. That said, "his guys" have typically turned out to be very good acquisitions, so I will not call his ability as GM into question.
Ruskell doesnt know jack about offense. His big spashy offensive moves have been a disaster. He has not drafted well offensively either. Another couple years and we will see if he figured it out this year.
Ruskell has done plenty of good moves, but he has made quite a few big mistakes. He showed up, and immediately wanted his own guys here.
Bringing Branch in due to D-Jacks injuries wasnt too smart. He should have known 1) that tiny WR's (unless your name is Steve Smith) dont make #1 guys, 2) giving a #2 WR like branch a huge contract is gonna divide the team.
Ruskell was arrogant enough after his 2005 Success to not care. Now he's paying bigtime.
And there is the Ice Fisherman Fiasco, Bryce Fisher (that wasnt handled very well), the absolute ignoring of the deteriorating offensive line untill it turned to swiss cheese...
Minus a couple of Ruskells Ego Trip mistakes, this team would have won the Super Bowl a couple times allready.
This year is it, after this we have an unknown quantity at coach, and if he doesnt keep Haskell as OC, we could end up hoping to go 10-6 and win games 17-13. Ewww.
Seriously Slave, lighten up with the doom and gloom stuff, it really bringing me down man 
The Seahawks are going to be fine, and the NFL isn't about to collapse.
This team is fine. Criticize Ruskell all you want. I hear Randy Mueller is available, we could bring him back.
Or maybe Bob Whitset, he never pissed anybody off.
This team has improved itself from the last two years. All this noise is just offseason BS. Once Camp rolls around, everybody will be on the field. It will be fine.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
