Winfield released
Moderator: Moderators
-
PurpleKoolaid
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8641
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
Re: Winfield released
Teams have used the Twins like that since my dad started watching them. Just a farm club.
-
Purple Domination
- Pro Bowl Elite Player
- Posts: 552
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:07 pm
- Location: Austin, TX
Re: Winfield released
Eh I am not losing too much sleep over it. Outside of Sidney, they got T-Jack (no explanation needed), Harvin (Headcase and we got a lot in return), and Winfield (an expensive 35 year old player). Sidney is definitely the player I wish we kept.MelanieMFunk wrote:Minnesota Vikings=Seattle Seahawks' minor league team.
-
PacificNorseWest
- Career Elite Player
- Posts: 2936
- Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am
- Location: Seattle, Wa
Re: Winfield released
Sidney spends half the season injured anyway.
Re: Winfield released
So far the Vikings have had the upper hand in their dealings. I'd take Hutch in his prime over any of the players the Seahawks ended up with other than Harvin.Purple Domination wrote: Eh I am not losing too much sleep over it. Outside of Sidney, they got T-Jack (no explanation needed), Harvin (Headcase and we got a lot in return), and Winfield (an expensive 35 year old player). Sidney is definitely the player I wish we kept.
Re: Winfield released
That's one way of looking at it.Purple Domination wrote:Outside of Sidney, they got T-Jack (no explanation needed), Harvin (Headcase and we got a lot in return), and Winfield (an expensive 35 year old player). Sidney is definitely the player I wish we kept.
The other is they got a (when healthy) top-25 WR, top-10 WR/KR, a top-10 corner (depending on how you grade such things, possibly the #1 slot corner in all of football) and a top-10 special teamer (Farwell). So it's all about your perspective. I'm still bitter because these are all NFL starters at their respective positions and, apart from Farwell, positions of great need for us.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
-
HardcoreVikesFan
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6652
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
Re: Winfield released
If we had sign Housh, I don't think there would have been a Percy Harvin in Minnesota. Nor do I think there would have been a Sidney Rice emergence either. It is really interesting to think how different 2009 and beyond would have been if we signed Housh.80 PurplePride 84 wrote:And they previously signed Burleson away from us and stole Houshmandzadeh out from under our noses in FA in 09. (We lucked out on Housh.)
A Randy Moss fan for life. A Kevin Williams fan for life.
-
PacificNorseWest
- Career Elite Player
- Posts: 2936
- Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am
- Location: Seattle, Wa
Re: Winfield released
It's hard to say who has officially gotten the upperhand. Previous to this year I would say Minnesota, but it's yet to be seen just how well the Seahawks are these next few years. Harvin and Winfield were essentially the final pieces to what Seattle is probably deeming a Championship run/team.
Re: Winfield released
I would actually say for the most part, the players they've taken from us hasn't really worked out for them before. Tjackson, Rice, burleson etc. If Rice had, they wouldn't need Harvin!
I do think the teams were pretty neck and neck overall as far as how good they are. Sure we lost in seattle but I'm not convinced they beat us in the dome. Now with Harvin and Winfield I suppose you kind of have to give them a little bit more of an edge. On the other hand, who knows if they'll mesh with their new teams in different systems and stay healthy or if our young draft replacements + greg Jennings can outshine.
I do think the teams were pretty neck and neck overall as far as how good they are. Sure we lost in seattle but I'm not convinced they beat us in the dome. Now with Harvin and Winfield I suppose you kind of have to give them a little bit more of an edge. On the other hand, who knows if they'll mesh with their new teams in different systems and stay healthy or if our young draft replacements + greg Jennings can outshine.
Re: Winfield released
Rice and Harvin are different players. And Rice didn't have an awful season last year. I'd also say the Burleson has had a quality career for them. His '07 and '08 he combined for nearly as many TDs and receptions as in three seasons with us!mondry wrote:I would actually say for the most part, the players they've taken from us hasn't really worked out for them before. Tjackson, Rice, burleson etc. If Rice had, they wouldn't need Harvin!
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Re: Winfield released
Winfield's deal in Seattle isn't as originally reported. $500K signing bonus, $500K guaranteed of a $1M base salary, $500K tied to being on the weekly active roster and $1M in playing time bonuses and incentives.
Winfield’s deal has base value of $2 million
Posted by Mike Florio on April 18, 2013, 1:10 PM EDT
We know the drill by now. Initial reports of a new contract often look better than the deal itself reveals.
The latest example? Seahawks cornerback Antoine Winfield.
Six days ago, multiple media outlets reported that the one-year agreement is worth $3 million. They forgot to include “up to” in front of that.
more:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/
Re: Winfield released
I've been pondering (brooding?) about the Winfield release and a couple of thoughts came to mind that I'll share with all:
1) Harvin leaving vs. Winfield leaving - I actually have less of an issue with Harvin leaving because:
a) we received decent compensation for him; and
b) as good as he is - for whatever the reason - he wasn't committed to the team Minnesota assembled and therefore wasn't likely to put forth 'his best' when it comes down to it. This isn't an indictment agains Harvin, it's a subconcious trait that we all will exhibit to varying degrees. It's human nature not to emtionally invest oneself in a cause one does not believe in. I don't mean to say that "Percy plays only when Percy wants to play," that's not it. He plays hard and would have played hard if he'd stayed, but I don't think he'd given that 110% that a fully committed player will give. It's just human nature to a degree
2) Winfield was that player that gave 110% He (in my mind) was such an example and mentor for the rest of the team, I believe he gave that 110% and motivated others to do the same. They 'bought into" the team being much more important than themselves and played that way. Do I think an aging corner is worth $7M? No. And from a business standpoint Spielman made the correct decision. The way it was allegedly handled (if true) may end up hurting the team. Here are some facts:
a) There was a huge dropoff in our pass defense when Winfield went out of the game last year. I don't think it was because he is a huge impact player (although an argument can be made that he is - I think it is another factor) but rather his leadership and motivational skills on the field. Winfield 'bought in' to the team philosophy and assumed the role of "player-coach" in my estimation. He has credibility with the players because his play is so good and he represents (to a degree) management/coaching.
b) Because Winfield can be viewed as one of "the leadership" on this team, players will learn from and emulate these players. In turn, the players will learn how rewards/punishment are assessed based on certain actions. Up until Winfield was cut, he was viewed as a valuable player and one the team supported. This obviously rewards the 'team first' mentality. When Winfield was cut, it became a: what are my (management's) benefits for keeping/cutting the player. Winfield was hurt by giving 110% two years ago and the team continued to stand by him. That sent a powerful (good) message. The problem with cutting him (at least in the manner that was alleged) is that if I'm a young player, I'm going to figure out pretty quickly that if I get hurt, I may be the same (perceived) dead wieght that apparently Winfield was viewed as being when his salary became to high. That will certainly de-motivate me (subconciously or conciously) to play with the amount of effort that may result in a shortened career.
No - We are not an old folks home or a shelter for troubled youth, and I agree. The primary difference was I believe we tried to work with our "troubled youth" and didn't make any progress before we went in another direction. Our venerated elder was asked if he would allow us to raise his rent (= pay cut) and his grandson (Agent) says, "No". We then evict grandpa from his apartment without any lengthy further conversations. If I was in that same apartment building I might be looking for one a little more friendly apartment building to live in.
Apologies for the excessive metaphors
1) Harvin leaving vs. Winfield leaving - I actually have less of an issue with Harvin leaving because:
a) we received decent compensation for him; and
b) as good as he is - for whatever the reason - he wasn't committed to the team Minnesota assembled and therefore wasn't likely to put forth 'his best' when it comes down to it. This isn't an indictment agains Harvin, it's a subconcious trait that we all will exhibit to varying degrees. It's human nature not to emtionally invest oneself in a cause one does not believe in. I don't mean to say that "Percy plays only when Percy wants to play," that's not it. He plays hard and would have played hard if he'd stayed, but I don't think he'd given that 110% that a fully committed player will give. It's just human nature to a degree
2) Winfield was that player that gave 110% He (in my mind) was such an example and mentor for the rest of the team, I believe he gave that 110% and motivated others to do the same. They 'bought into" the team being much more important than themselves and played that way. Do I think an aging corner is worth $7M? No. And from a business standpoint Spielman made the correct decision. The way it was allegedly handled (if true) may end up hurting the team. Here are some facts:
a) There was a huge dropoff in our pass defense when Winfield went out of the game last year. I don't think it was because he is a huge impact player (although an argument can be made that he is - I think it is another factor) but rather his leadership and motivational skills on the field. Winfield 'bought in' to the team philosophy and assumed the role of "player-coach" in my estimation. He has credibility with the players because his play is so good and he represents (to a degree) management/coaching.
b) Because Winfield can be viewed as one of "the leadership" on this team, players will learn from and emulate these players. In turn, the players will learn how rewards/punishment are assessed based on certain actions. Up until Winfield was cut, he was viewed as a valuable player and one the team supported. This obviously rewards the 'team first' mentality. When Winfield was cut, it became a: what are my (management's) benefits for keeping/cutting the player. Winfield was hurt by giving 110% two years ago and the team continued to stand by him. That sent a powerful (good) message. The problem with cutting him (at least in the manner that was alleged) is that if I'm a young player, I'm going to figure out pretty quickly that if I get hurt, I may be the same (perceived) dead wieght that apparently Winfield was viewed as being when his salary became to high. That will certainly de-motivate me (subconciously or conciously) to play with the amount of effort that may result in a shortened career.
No - We are not an old folks home or a shelter for troubled youth, and I agree. The primary difference was I believe we tried to work with our "troubled youth" and didn't make any progress before we went in another direction. Our venerated elder was asked if he would allow us to raise his rent (= pay cut) and his grandson (Agent) says, "No". We then evict grandpa from his apartment without any lengthy further conversations. If I was in that same apartment building I might be looking for one a little more friendly apartment building to live in.
Apologies for the excessive metaphors
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
-
PurpleKoolaid
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8641
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
Re: Winfield released
^
Good post Just Me.
I think PH has a short fuse, didnt like the type of O Musgrave runs, and the kind of QB Ponder is, and he wanted out. He will be happier at Seatle where im better hes a star. Even more so then he was here.
I think Winfield may have taken less pay from Seatle, mainly because of the way he was treated here, while still under contract. I dont think it was minaly because Seatle may be in the SB sooner. I dont like the way the Vikes Org. handle somee things since the Wilfs have taken over, and the way Tice was let go, virtually at the game, with a 9-7 record and then numbnuts was named HC.
Good post Just Me.
I think PH has a short fuse, didnt like the type of O Musgrave runs, and the kind of QB Ponder is, and he wanted out. He will be happier at Seatle where im better hes a star. Even more so then he was here.
I think Winfield may have taken less pay from Seatle, mainly because of the way he was treated here, while still under contract. I dont think it was minaly because Seatle may be in the SB sooner. I dont like the way the Vikes Org. handle somee things since the Wilfs have taken over, and the way Tice was let go, virtually at the game, with a 9-7 record and then numbnuts was named HC.
Re: Winfield released
We continue to see claims that Winfield took less money to play in Seattle, but I don't think anyone outside of the negotiations knows that for certain. Seattle's incentive-laden one-year contract proves that there wasn't a huge market for Winfield's services, and I'm sure the Vikings knew this while negotiating.PurpleKoolaid wrote:I think Winfield may have taken less pay from Seatle, mainly because of the way he was treated here, while still under contract.
Re: Winfield released
Unless the Vikes can pick up a good CB in the draft and have one of the current ones on the roster step up, Winfield will be missed even at 35 years old. Its real tough to replace someone with that experience and petigree. The Vikes should have tried to rework his contract but going young at the position could work also. Time will tell.