Nate B

ColdBeef · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1208 Location: Tualatin, OR

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/26/burleson-suggests-hell-give-seahawks-a-chance-to-match-any-offer/

I've been monitoring this on PFT lately, I don't see how the Hawks DON'T bring back Nate especially if he's doing all he can to stay a Seahawk. Branch will be gone, and you have a promising but untested Butler waiting to fill in, but Nate has been very good when healthy. We have enough holes to fill in the draft without worrying too much about WR, I'm going to be very disappointed if we don't hang on to Nate Burleson.
_________________
Football games aren't played on paper, they're played inside TV sets.

CamasMan · Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:46 pm Post subject:

I'm a Burleson fan and really hope he stays. By contrast, I'm totally over Branch. He just didn't show heart last year.

If we have Branch but not Burleson in 2010, I'll be beside myself.
_________________
-CamasMan
Colonel Crush - Films of ACTION!

Randyman · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 778 Location: Beaverton, OR

I would trade Branch for a long-snapper, a back-up punter, a beer...........anything.
_________________
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to prosper" - Benjamin Franklin

ColdBeef · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1208 Location: Tualatin, OR

I would trade Branch if in return we got two throwback games in which we wore royal blue with silver helmets.
_________________
Football games aren't played on paper, they're played inside TV sets.

sqwert · Beware of lasers! Joined: 22 Dec 2007 Posts: 838

OK please can some one fill me in here. I have been confused about Nate's contract for some time. When Nate was signed I clearly remember it being a ridiculous, back loaded contract and the talk was he would never play it out with out restructure. Now here we are apparently at the end of his contract and I can not for the life of me recall ever hearing about a restructure or anything like that. So did Nate in fact make ridiculous money last year? Or am I completely delusional about past events?
_________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan

Dave Hamilton · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1474 Location: Everett, WA

They did restructure. I don't remember the details.

Stealth · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1963 Location: Dayton Ohio

Found this info on the subject, he really wasn't making that much for being the best reciever on the team....

Mike Sando, of the Tacoma News Tribune, reports the Seattle Seahawks have restructured WR Nate Burleson's contract. His contract is now a five-year deal with last season counted as the first year, meaning he will become an unrestricted free-agent in 2010. Burleson is scheduled to receive $2.75 million this season and $3.25 million in 2008 as well as 2009.

CamasMan · Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:42 am Post subject:

With all the needs on our team, I really hope that we don't lose Nate. Currently, with Nate, Housh, and Butler, we're okay at the receiver spot, but without proven depth. Losing Nate would mean yet another position of immediate need.
_________________
-CamasMan
Colonel Crush - Films of ACTION!

sqwert · Beware of lasers! Joined: 22 Dec 2007 Posts: 838

Thanks you guys, I guess I missed that news back in the day. It all becomes clear now.

I too hope we find a way to keep him a hawk.
_________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan

DarthKripple · Joined: 12 Oct 2007 Posts: 1551

Adam Schefter reports via Twitter that Nate reached a five year deal with the lions within two hours of free agency's start period. This probably means he wanted more years, and the lions have really become the place for former seahawks. Is Patrick Kearney next? Will Kenny Easily be traded once again under shifty circumstances?

Time will tell, but Rob Sims could be on the Lions radar.
_________________
"It's a money party, one giant money party" -Joe Scarborough

"Whales don't beach themselves they are victims of Walter Jones' Dog Paddle."

BillHarvey · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 728 Location: Arlington, VA

Lions : Seahawks :: Royals : Mariners

Stealth · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1963 Location: Dayton Ohio

Ouch, that was quick. I thought he and the Seahawks would make a deal. Our most explosive playmaker is gone in a matter of two hours...not a good thing.

ColdBeef · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 1208 Location: Tualatin, OR

Yeah, I'm definitely bummed out about it. $11 mil guaranteed is a pretty good deal for Nate's services. So that's just one more hole to fill, probably through the draft. Nate's among the best options on the FA market at WR, so I don't see any impact players being signed at WR if we're not going to pay for Nate.
_________________
Football games aren't played on paper, they're played inside TV sets.

CamasMan · Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:30 am Post subject:

Carroll and Schneider have made their first big mistake. Add yet another position of need.
_________________
-CamasMan
Colonel Crush - Films of ACTION!

Go Hawks! · Joined: 02 Jan 2008 Posts: 922

Mistake? I'd rather have Nate, but have no problem with them blowing everything up and re-building through the draft. As long as we stay away from signing other moderately to high priced FA's.......