Seahawks Insider

DE Jackson waiting for Curry to sign?

Post by Eric Williams on Aug. 3, 2009 at 2:54 pm with 19 Comments »
August 3, 2009 2:54 pm

That’s the word from Kansas City Star reporter Adam Teicher, who said the Kansas City Cheifs are waiting for Aaron Curry to sign with Seattle before inking a deal with the team’s No. 3 overall pick, DE Tyson Jackson.

Teicher also predicted that Jackson will sign by midweek, and at the end of the week at the latest.

Here’s an excerpt.

Much depends on when the Seahawks sign Aaron Curry, the linebacker they selected with the fourth pick, or one spot behind Jackson. The Chiefs appear content to wait until Curry signs before getting serious with the Jackson negotiations. Once Curry is signed, Jackson likely won’t be far behind.

The Chiefs appear to be the ones driving this delay. No doubt they have a date in mind when they believe Jackson needs to be in camp for him to be of help when the regular season begins. Obviously, that point isn’t at hand.

As we reported earlier on the Curry’s negotiations, Hawks GM Tim Ruskell hinted during his interview with reporters last week that Curry’s representation was using New York Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez’s $28 million guaranteed money figure as part of the negotiations, while the team seemed to believe that the Sanchez contract should not be a factor because he’s a quarterback.

So the thought process was once Jackson signed with Kansas City, the Seahawks would have a comparable number to bring back to the table in the Curry negotiations. However, if Jackson’s agents are waiting for Curry to sign, that scenario goes out the window. So it seems we are waiting to see who blinks first, the Chiefs of the Seahawks. Stay tuned.

Categories:
General Seahawks
Leave a comment Comments → 19
  1. Hey Timmay Numbskull Sign the Friggen Contract already

  2. chuck_easton says:

    maumau,

    I say it’s the other way around. Curry just sign the contract. The guy isn’t worth 5 years at 60 million with a 28+ million bonus.

    Don’t put it on Ruskell.

  3. Ruskell never wanted Curry he wanted to trade the pick away, so he was forced to pick the best available player.
    NO One is worth that kinda money, but the going rate is the going rate
    I have not been a Ruskell hater, much, but am starting to .
    Either way the TEAM Suffers with this BS contract dispute

  4. chuck_easton says:

    Second of all it is the player and the agent that sign the contract. The team just makes an offer and it is up to the player and his agent to accept or not. Apparently Curry and his agent are holding out for more money.

    At some point the team has to say “that’s our best offer take it or leave it.”

    The team can’t force the player to sign and they can’t be held hostage to the player and his agent’s ridiculous demeands.

    Try this tomorrow. Go to your boss and say “I refuse to work any more unless you pay me X” See where it gets you.

  5. Fourty_five_circa_84 says:

    Alright alright . . . give me the pen and I will sign for Curry. Heck I will only charge 1%. Then everyone will be happy, except Curry’s agent.

  6. nidhighe says:

    I think it’s reasonable for a player to want to be paid better than another player picked later in the draft, even if it’s only one pick later. What a rookie is worth is determined largely by what spot he was drafted in.

    The real blame belongs with the teams. They wait until days before training camp to start negotiating seriously with their top picks, when they should begin serious negotiations the day after the draft.

  7. chuck_easton says:

    The problem here is the player that was picked one place later in the draft is a QB. QB contracts are usually higher by nature. That is the hold up here. Sanchez signed a QB contract of 5 years 60 million with a 28 million signing bonus as the #5 pick. No player, other than a QB gets that kind of contract but Curry is holding out for the same or better than what NY paid their starting QB.

    If anything the team needs to see what the #6 player signs for and beat that contract.

  8. The collective bargaining agreement is a joke. The rookie salary structure is a joke. Rookies getting more than Pro Bowlers is a joke.

  9. nidhighe says:

    No player other than QB gets that kind of contract? OT Jason Smith reportedly got more guaranteed money than Sanchez. Curry should get something inbetween Smith and Curry.

  10. nidhighe says:

    Sorry, make that Smith and Sanchez.

  11. hawkdawg says:

    Smith got $33 million in sure dough at #2. So if the Hawks and Curry are arguing over the “QB” premium, it’s not super clear how big it really is……

  12. The NFL Network is showing Week 10 of the 1990 season, Seahawks vs. the Kansas City Chiefs. Its the game where Thomas sacked Dave Krieg nine times. Thank God those days are over.

  13. Dukeshire says:

    “Ruskell never wanted Curry he wanted to trade the pick away, so he was forced to pick the best available player.” I may have missed something, I often do, but what evidence do you have to support this view?

    I’m blown away he’s not in camp. If he’s not in by weeks end I’m sure that will turn from disappointment to anger. But at who? I can see both sides and understand how the “game” is played. And what ever feelings we all may have about it, the first time he buries someone and makes them one with the turf, all will be forgiven. This too I know: Bobby is right, the system needs an overhaul. Of course I fear that will lead to a “work stoppage”. Let’s hope it won’t come to that.

  14. Dukeshire says:

    Thanks for the heads up!

  15. MadSweeney42 says:

    Never ceases to make me laugh when people start comparing NFL contracts with normal jobs. Especially when those jobs don’t involve a contractual length of time. Not anywhere near the same stratosphere.

    Nice heads up on the classic game, which brings me to a question for Eric. Has there been any talk of having a throwback jersey game? Preferably a night home game. I would love to see one game a season with the unis I grew up watching. Also, any chance they’ll switch to blue pants on the road? I think it looks so much better than white on white. In fact, I’ll go on record with really, really disliking white on white…

  16. jerrycurl says:

    It should also be noted that Smith’s contract was for 6 years so the guaranteed money is actually less per year than what Sanchez got over 5 years. Which goes back to the point of a LB contract @ #4 not being on par with a QB contract @ #5. Also wasn’t Curry the one who was saying he would take less than Stafford to go #1 to Detroit. Seems like a bit of a double standard. I can’t blame someone for wanting to get paid, but this bass ackward.

  17. nidhighe says:

    When it comes to guaranteed money, total amount is more important than how it breaks down per year under the salary cap.

  18. To repeat myself, the NFL needs to find a way to penalize these holdouts; or else imitate the NBA with preset rookie salaries.

  19. oceanic says:

    If there is a 2010 season there will be a rookie salary cap. If Curry does not think he is being offered enough now, how would he feel about being put back in the rookie pool next April (with no $$$ coming in) and having to sign for about 30% of the current offer?

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0