Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Burleson's contract


bushwacked
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been involved in a heated discussion that has some ties to the discussions here.

 

Everyone knows that Seattle signed Nate Burleson to a 7-year 49 million dollar contract that has widely been reported as "in reality, a 4-year 14.5 million dollar deal," with the last 3 years and 34.5 million completely voidable. Nate's guaranteed $$ was reported as 5.25 million which was to be paid as a 4 million dollar signing bonus and a the 1.25 million he was paid last year.

 

A bunch of Seahawk homers are claiming that Seattle is, for the most part, free of any further financial implication to Nate or against the cap. I'm claiming since his contract was widely reported as 4-years/14.5 million, that is probably the actual $$$ that Seattle is realistically entitled against the cap and/or Nate.

 

It seems to me that if the Hawks could clean their hands of him they would have already done so or at least restructured the remaining 9.5 million over the next 3 years. Can someone help me clarify the situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I understand it, it is more of a 3-year, 14 million dollar contract, with the other three years thrown on for fun. They will keep him through the 2008 season and then cut him or restructure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I understand it, it is more of a 3-year, 14 million dollar contract, with the other three years thrown on for fun. They will keep him through the 2008 season and then cut him or restructure.

 

This sounds right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been involved in a heated discussion that has some ties to the discussions here.

 

Everyone knows that Seattle signed Nate Burleson to a 7-year 49 million dollar contract that has widely been reported as "in reality, a 4-year 14.5 million dollar deal," with the last 3 years and 34.5 million completely voidable. Nate's guaranteed $$ was reported as 5.25 million which was to be paid as a 4 million dollar signing bonus and a the 1.25 million he was paid last year.

 

A bunch of Seahawk homers are claiming that Seattle is, for the most part, free of any further financial implication to Nate or against the cap. I'm claiming since his contract was widely reported as 4-years/14.5 million, that is probably the actual $$$ that Seattle is realistically entitled against the cap and/or Nate.

 

It seems to me that if the Hawks could clean their hands of him they would have already done so or at least restructured the remaining 9.5 million over the next 3 years. Can someone help me clarify the situation?

 

 

The real question is, Jerry Porter or Nate Burleson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information