Seahawks remove the franchise tag off hill

[39thebeast]

Mike Lombardi Reports the Seahwks removed the tag of Hill after selecting Curry.

This kinds makes sense since Hill was supposed to take over for Peterson at SLB, but they decide to save some cash and replace Peterson with Curry on the strongside next to Lofa Tatupu in the middle.

The Rams main focus should be signing Jason Smith, but I would definately consider adding this guy and putting him on the strong side and flanking Laurantis with 2 excellent OLBS. In this system I think he would be a great fit and he definately wont be going for the 36 mil he was asking for before.

[Azul e Oro]

9 minutes.

See my post in Nick's draft notes if you don't get it.

[tdog08]

lol thats funny

[39thebeast]

9 minutes.

See my post in Nick's draft notes if you don't get it.

darn walked right into that one

[Azul e Oro]

Thank you
Good night
Tip your waitress

[bigtiger737]

Mike Lombardi Reports the Seahwks removed the tag of Hill after selecting Curry.

This kinds makes sense since Hill was supposed to take over for Peterson at SLB, but they decide to save some cash and replace Peterson with Curry on the strongside next to Lofa Tatupu in the middle.

The Rams main focus should be signing Jason Smith, but I would definately consider adding this guy and putting him on the strong side and flanking Laurantis with 2 excellent OLBS. In this system I think he would be a great fit and he definately wont be going for the 36 mil he was asking for before.

I say Yes if we could afford him? Have no idea what he wants or what we have right now, or what we will need for mr 2

[bluengreen]

Hill is a solid LB, I'm sorry to see him go but he wants too much money - we offered him 6/36 and he turned it down - and we can't have all of our $ tied up in our LBers again. I don't think he's going to get quite the paycheck he's looking for though but I would hate to see him go to you guys.

[TekeRam]

If we could afford it, sure, as it hurts the hags, and it helps us. Plus, it pretty much works like getting Curry and Smith in the first. Unfortunately, we don't have the cap room to make this happen. He's going to act like a franchise player, and is going to go to some team that has the cap room, and there's plenty of them that can give him way too much money. The key to me is that he's not going to be playing against us twice a year, and I was really dreading seeing a trio of Lofa, Hill and Curry all looking to get Jax. Now he just has two of them to break.

We can't get him, but I think our LB's will be fine and he'll be leaving the division most likely, so win win.

[itsguud]

If we could afford it, sure, as it hurts the hags, and it helps us. Plus, it pretty much works like getting Curry and Smith in the first. Unfortunately, we don't have the cap room to make this happen. He's going to act like a franchise player, and is going to go to some team that has the cap room, and there's plenty of them that can give him way too much money. The key to me is that he's not going to be playing against us twice a year, and I was really dreading seeing a trio of Lofa, Hill and Curry all looking to get Jax. Now he just has two of them to break.

We can't get him, but I think our LB's will be fine and he'll be leaving the division most likely, so win win.

But can't we get him? Considering next year is uncapped can't we just spend every penny with a low front ended contract to get him? Theoretically we could spend every cent we have free on him and it wouldn't matter for the following year.

[Fortuninerhater]

If we thought he was that much better than Pisa, we could cut Tino to open up cap space to sign him. Not likely, but certainly a possibility I would think. Not sure what the cap hit would be however.

[Goldenfleece]

But can't we get him? Considering next year is uncapped can't we just spend every penny with a low front ended contract to get him? Theoretically we could spend every cent we have free on him and it wouldn't matter for the following year.

From what I understand, next year is only uncapped if they're unable to renegotiate the collective bargaining agreement. In order to get a guy to sign a back-loaded contract, we'd have to put a lot of guarantees in there, which would mean we wouldn't have much wiggle room if they did get a new CBA in place.

If bluengreen is right that he turned down 6 years/$36 million, I'd say he's asking more than he's worth.