PDA

View Full Version : Burelson heading to Seattle



vikenheel_zdl16
04-01-2006, 01:38 AM
Heres the story, by the way nice too meet yall.


Burelson officially gone

Although the Vikings had until 11 p.m. Central time tonight to match or decline the offer made by the Seahawks on Nate Burleson, VU has confirmed that the team has declined to match the offer and Burleson is officially a Seahawk.

Although the deal was reported as seven years for $49 million, in actuality it a four-year deal worth $4.5 million with $5.2 million of the deal guaranteed.

By declining the match, the Vikings receive a third-round pick from Seattle -- No. 95 overall. As a result, the Vikings have five picks in the top 100 -- Nos. 17, 48, 51, 83 and 95.

V4L
04-01-2006, 01:41 AM
Yup he is gone man it sucks


1000 yards n 7 TD's next year for Nate

vikenheel_zdl16
04-01-2006, 01:43 AM
I think the Vikings kinda jumped on the bandwagon of Burelson too early. I mean he was expected to replace Moss which definately didn't happen.

cogitans
04-01-2006, 01:46 AM
It was maybe too much for him to carry the load as #1 WR.

Still he battled some injuries last year, which also affected his performances somewhat.

cogitans
04-01-2006, 02:00 AM
From Kffl.com

Vikings | Team will not match Burleson's offer sheet
Fri, 31 Mar 2006 16:59:02 -0800

Sean Jensen, of the Pioneer Press, reports the Minnesota Vikings decided not to match the Seattle Seahawks multi-year contract offer to WR Nate Burleson, Minnesota vice president Rob Brzezinski said Friday, March 31. The Vikings will receive a third-round pick from Seattle in next month's NFL Draft as compensation.

ultravikingfan
04-01-2006, 02:02 AM
"vikenheel_zdl16" wrote:

I think the Vikings kinda jumped on the bandwagon of Burelson too early. I mean he was expected to replace Moss which definately didn't happen.

Nobody expected him to replace Moss.

mblack76
04-01-2006, 02:07 AM
Vikings let Burleson go to Seattle

Judd Zulgad, Star Tribune
Last update: March 31, 2006 – 5:30 PM

The Vikings won't match the seven-year, $49 million offer sheet receiver Nate Burleson signed with Seattle, according to a team official.
Rob Brzezinski, the Vikings' vice president of football operations, said late Friday afternoon that the team will allow the restricted free agent to go to the Seahawks. In return, the Vikings will get Seattle's third-round draft choice in the NFL draft next month. The Vikings had until 11 tonight to make a decision.

That will give the Vikings five selections in the first three rounds or among the first 95 picks. Minnesota will pick 17th overall in the first round, as well as 48th and 51st in the second round and 83rd and 95th in the third.

In reality, Burleson's contract will be a four-year deal worth $14.5 million over four years. The seven-year, $49 million offer was identical to the one the Vikings gave Pro Bowl guard Steve Hutchinson to lure him away from the Seahawks.

That included a "poison pill" clause that caused some ill will between the teams. The Vikings' contract offer to Hutchinson contained language that it would become guaranteed if the Pro Bowl guard was not the highest-paid offensive lineman on his team at the time of the offer. The Seahawks contested this but lost in a ruling before a special master.

Seattle then came back and inserted two clauses in Burleson's offer that called for the receiver to be guaranteed the entire $49 million if he plays at least five games in the state of Minnesota, or if his average per year is more than the average of his team's highest-paid running back.

http://www.startribune.com/510/story/343970.html

nephilimstorm
04-01-2006, 02:17 AM
Gone with the wind...bye Burley...darn

ejmat
04-01-2006, 02:40 AM
Well at least we get a 3rd rounder for him. We are losing a class act as far as I'm concerned however, it doesn't hurt too much.

Not anything I've heard but I predict the Vikings are going to try and trade up in the draft. Just an opinion. They will use their 1st, a 2nd rounder, and a third, along with Kleinsasser to move up in the draft. Maybe it will, maybe it won't but it's my prediction.

Redmption
04-01-2006, 03:00 AM
I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

kramer9guy
04-01-2006, 03:36 AM
"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

Well said.

And I agree.

PackSux!
04-01-2006, 03:38 AM
"vikenheel_zdl16" wrote:

I think the Vikings kinda jumped on the bandwagon of Burelson too early. I mean he was expected to replace Moss which definately didn't happen.

Nobody ever expected Burly to replace Moss, Tice thought he could replace moss with Troy. But the fact is nobody will ever replace Randy Moss.

PurplePride80
04-01-2006, 03:43 AM
"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

PackSux!
04-01-2006, 03:53 AM
"PurplePride80" wrote:

"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

Who is Alan Faneca? And what could he possibly say about that? We got both of seattles first round draft picks of 2001 for free. We drafted nate in 2003 in the 3rd round and we get a third round pick for him. Win Vikings all the way, anyone who disagrees needs to have their head examined.

PackSux!
04-01-2006, 03:54 AM
"PackSux!" wrote:

"PurplePride80" wrote:

"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

Who is Alan Faneca? And what could he possibly say about that? We got both of seattles first round draft picks of 2001 for zero compensation. We drafted nate in 2003 in the 3rd round and we get a third round pick for him. Win Vikings all the way, anyone who disagrees needs to have their head examined.

BigMoInAZ
04-01-2006, 03:56 AM
Faneca is over rated! If you watched the Super Bowl, the long run by Parker was due to their RT, Barrett Brooks, making his block and not Faneca as the announcers kissed his arse in their monologue!

norseforce
04-01-2006, 04:03 AM
I liked nate ,was a great team player,poss. receiver with great hands, sorry but he was'nt supossed to replace moss, ... nobody is, picking up a third round is great, we have so many picks now, first choice #17 on best LB, then grab a QB with next pick,new uniforms' to be released the week before the draft, april 24, they said the helmet will be the same w/ small adjustment to the horn, not sure if purple pants would be for the home or away uni's

duffVIkEs
04-01-2006, 04:05 AM
Who is Alan Faneca?

haha :lol:

VikesfaninWis
04-01-2006, 04:14 AM
Burleson will never be a Randy Moss.. Moss is 10x better then Burleson can ever hope to be.. I like Burly, but we for sure got the better deal in the offer sheets. We got Hutch, and didn't have to give up any draft picks, they get Burly, and act like they just won the SB.. We get a draft pick for Burly, and they didn't get anything for Hutch, arguably their best offensive player. Good job Viking TOA, way to get it done..

Freakout
04-01-2006, 04:17 AM
"ejmat" wrote:

Well at least we get a 3rd rounder for him. We are losing a class act as far as I'm concerned however, it doesn't hurt too much.

Not anything I've heard but I predict the Vikings are going to try and trade up in the draft. Just an opinion. They will use their 1st, a 2nd rounder, and a third, along with Kleinsasser to move up in the draft. Maybe it will, maybe it won't but it's my prediction.

I expect him to get us a QB in the second round. The team still lacks starters and quality depth at several positions to be giving away so much.

norseforce
04-01-2006, 04:19 AM
we win w/ the hutch deal...we win w/ the burly deal.... and we will stomp those hutchless seagulls this year when we play

snowinapril
04-01-2006, 04:30 AM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:

"vikenheel_zdl16" wrote:

I think the Vikings kinda jumped on the bandwagon of Burelson too early. I mean he was expected to replace Moss which definately didn't happen.

Nobody expected him to replace Moss.

Wasn't T-Will the replacement for Moss? :roll:

i_bleed_purple
04-01-2006, 04:35 AM
Nate could never hope to replace Moss. he's nothing like moss. moss is a burner. he burns the DB for a long one, or he takes a short pass, and uses his speed to just plain outrun the db's. Burleson has decent speed, but is a better YAC type reciever. he uses his moves to avoid the tacklers.

I wish Nate the best of luck in seattle, and too bad he couldn't stay here.


one question tho, you say that the contract is really only 4 years, how do they get away with offering him a huge one that we would need to match, but as soon as we decline it turns into a 4 year contract?

snowinapril
04-01-2006, 04:49 AM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


one question tho, you say that the contract is really only 4 years, how do they get away with offering him a huge one that we would need to match, but as soon as we decline it turns into a 4 year contract?

They could have said, it was a 50 year $50 million contract if they wanted, it just sounds better with bigger numbers. Plus there is probably a max on contract lengths.

But................................

After 4 years, they will either ask him to restructure or just release him before spending that kind of money on Burley. If they keep him, then they have to pay him the contract.

That is how I interpreted it.

That is how they poison pilled it, along with the 6 games in MN.

PurplePride80
04-01-2006, 05:13 AM
"PackSux!" wrote:

"PurplePride80" wrote:

"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

Who is Alan Faneca? And what could he possibly say about that? We got both of seattles first round draft picks of 2001 for free. We drafted nate in 2003 in the 3rd round and we get a third round pick for him. Win Vikings all the way, anyone who disagrees needs to have their head examined.

Your probably already aware of this, but Alan Faneca is the left guard for the Steelers and he's just as good or maybe even better than Steve Hutchinson.

I know the Vikings got the best of the deal, but I just wanted to let everyone know that Faneca is on Hutchinson's level.

PurplePride80
04-01-2006, 05:18 AM
"BigMoInAZ" wrote:

Faneca is over rated! If you watched the Super Bowl, the long run by Parker was due to their RT, Barrett Brooks, making his block and not Faneca as the announcers kissed his arse in their monologue!

:shock:

ultravikingfan
04-01-2006, 05:19 AM
"PurplePride80" wrote:

"PackSux!" wrote:

"PurplePride80" wrote:

"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

Who is Alan Faneca? And what could he possibly say about that? We got both of seattles first round draft picks of 2001 for free. We drafted nate in 2003 in the 3rd round and we get a third round pick for him. Win Vikings all the way, anyone who disagrees needs to have their head examined.

Your probably already aware of this, but Alan Faneca is the left guard for the Steelers and he's just as good or maybe even better than Steve Hutchinson.

I know the Vikings got the best of the deal, but I just wanted to let everyone know that Faneca is on Hutchinson's level.

Faneca is the best in the NFL. Sorry Hutch.

magicci
04-01-2006, 05:22 AM
So in a few years you think there is a chance Burleson might come back?

PurplePumpkin
04-01-2006, 05:29 AM
Well I was hoping the FO had something up there sleeve to keep Burly But the truth is I'm not surprised. Good luck in Seattle Nate!

PAvikesfan
04-01-2006, 05:35 AM
good luck Nate!

FuadFan
04-01-2006, 06:09 AM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:

"PurplePride80" wrote:

"PackSux!" wrote:

"PurplePride80" wrote:

"Redmption" wrote:

I think its hillarious that the media is making it sound like Seattle is getting payback through Burleson... Hutchinson is the best player for his position in the leauge, Burleson isnt. We got Hutch for free, Seattle had to pay a 3rd rounder... So how does that equal payback? We got a stud pro bowler and a 3rd round pick for a #2 WR. I think we won...

^ Alan Faneca would have something to say about that.

Who is Alan Faneca? And what could he possibly say about that? We got both of seattles first round draft picks of 2001 for free. We drafted nate in 2003 in the 3rd round and we get a third round pick for him. Win Vikings all the way, anyone who disagrees needs to have their head examined.

Your probably already aware of this, but Alan Faneca is the left guard for the Steelers and he's just as good or maybe even better than Steve Hutchinson.

I know the Vikings got the best of the deal, but I just wanted to let everyone know that Faneca is on Hutchinson's level.

Faneca is the best in the NFL. Sorry Hutch.

You could also argue Will Shields of Kansas City is better then those two but the top three active would be them in whatever order you choose. Anyhow congrats Burleson and good luck in the future.

ejmat
04-01-2006, 06:18 AM
"Freakout" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

Well at least we get a 3rd rounder for him. We are losing a class act as far as I'm concerned however, it doesn't hurt too much.

Not anything I've heard but I predict the Vikings are going to try and trade up in the draft. Just an opinion. They will use their 1st, a 2nd rounder, and a third, along with Kleinsasser to move up in the draft. Maybe it will, maybe it won't but it's my prediction.

I expect him to get us a QB in the second round. The team still lacks starters and quality depth at several positions to be giving away so much.

True we would be giving away alot however we won't miss a pick in any round. Since we have 2 in the 2nd and 2 in the 3rd. We need a QB of the future. Remember we secured a lot of positions in free agency.

Either way, I won't be disappointed so long if we stay at 17 we are able to get someone like Ernie Sims or Thomas Howard. Then pick up someone like Omar Jacobs in the 2nd round. I do not want Croyle.

cajunvike
04-01-2006, 06:25 AM
"vikenheel_zdl16" wrote:

Heres the story, by the way nice too meet yall.


Burelson officially gone

Although the Vikings had until 11 p.m. Central time tonight to match or decline the offer made by the Seahawks on Nate Burleson, VU has confirmed that the team has declined to match the offer and Burleson is officially a Seahawk.

Although the deal was reported as seven years for $49 million, in actuality it a four-year deal worth $4.5 million with $5.2 million of the deal guaranteed.

By declining the match, the Vikings receive a third-round pick from Seattle -- No. 95 overall. As a result, the Vikings have five picks in the top 100 -- Nos. 17, 48, 51, 83 and 95.

EDIT THE TITLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's Burleson, no Burelson!!!

BTW, welcome kivenhele-dzl61... :razz:

Prophet
04-01-2006, 02:37 PM
A moment of silence....good, that's over with. Move on.

Prophet
04-04-2006, 11:09 PM
KFFL
Seahawks | Contract update: Burleson
Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:21:05 -0700

Seattle Seahawks WR Nate Burleson signed a seven-year contract with base salaries of $1.25 million (2006), $2.75 million (2007), $3.25 million (2008), $3.25 million (2009), $10.5 million (2010), $12 million (2011), and $12 million (2012).

V4L
04-04-2006, 11:12 PM
Yah they backloaded his contract so they will rework the deal later.. They didn't really overpay him..

1000 yards and 7 TD's for Burly for sure.. Im calling it

snowinapril
04-04-2006, 11:26 PM
"Prophet" wrote:

KFFL
Seahawks | Contract update: Burleson
Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:21:05 -0700

Seattle Seahawks WR Nate Burleson signed a seven-year contract with base salaries of $1.25 million (2006), $2.75 million (2007), $3.25 million (2008), $3.25 million (2009), $10.5 million (2010), $12 million (2011), and $12 million (2012).

I hope he got a signing bonus.

If I was the Vikes, I would have been willing to pay him 2.5 this year. That is just me. It is too bad we got Poison Pilled over #81.

I think he is PRETTY MUCH guaranteed to get his 2006 and 2007 salaries. But if he doesn't produce, they would probably make him restructure for a lot less or just cut him. But I don't think that he is going to be a bust in Seattle. I am confident that he will get paid his money through 2009.

That is a nice chunk of change even if he doesn't get the last 3 years of that deal.

VIKINGinGEORGIA
04-05-2006, 09:30 PM
Did we get a third rounder for Nate?

magicci
04-05-2006, 09:38 PM
yes

WinonaVike
04-05-2006, 09:39 PM
Sure did

shawn9876uss
04-05-2006, 09:42 PM
yep, a late one though