5 ways Golden Tate leaving helps Seattle

3
255

It’s never fun losing your favorite players, especially when your team just won the Super bowl. However there’s usually a silver lining when somebody leaves town. A lot of Seahawks fans are upset by Golden TateĀ leaving for the Detroit Lions, but here are five reasons it’s actually good for the team long term.

1. More money for Doug Baldwin

Realistically, the Seahawks were never going to be able to bring back both Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin, so they had to make a choice. If that is indeed the case then I believe the organization made the right call. As of right now, Baldwin is attached to a second-round tender and has a two million one year deal sitting on the table. Baldwin is wise not to take it because there’s a good chance another team will make a higher offer. As long as it’s not an outlandish contract the Seahawks will probably match it – anything in the range of $6 million per year or less should be acceptable.

Baldwin is also more consistent than Tate. He has zero fumbles thus far in his NFL career. He makes fewer mental mistakes on the field like running backward after the catch and taking chances by runnning out of the end zone when the kick is too deep. Football Outsiders ranks Baldwin as the second most efficient wide receiver in the NFL per play, so he’s barely scratched the surface of what he can do.

A while back I made a Twitter poll asking the 12th man which they would rather keep if they had to choose. By a four to one margin they went for Baldwin, so I have to believe that the fans will get over Tate leaving pretty quick.

1
2
3
4
5
Previous articleTennessee Titans free agency Day 3 preview: Who's coming to town?
Next articleBucs quarterback blunders
  • Zack

    I agree with most of the 5 reasons. However, you’re wrong regarding Tate calling out Thurman and Browner as being selfish. Tate’s absolutely right for calling them out because it wasn’t a first offense. At that point, there’s no more waiting to say something. At no time did those 2 ever take into consideration how this would hurt their team if they got caught again. Tate, as any true leader would do, called them out and spoke for almost every player on the roster and a majority of the 12th man. Notice the coaches didn’t bother to correct or discuss the issue with him. That say’s to me the coaches felt the same way.

  • Don

    I have to disagree. 1. Baldwin is not better and has not stayed on the field. He plays in slot not Tate so harvin hurts Baldwin not Tate. Tate had more catches less drops and can return punts. 2. Harvin can’t stay on the field. Who had more impact on this season and last from the receivers? Tate. Chemistry. Seriously. With the mouths on defense and everyone else Tate’s game winning taunting really had effect on chemistry and he should call out the two players who were selfish. Money is ur last reason. If they pay Baldwin it shows how little they know , and you too, about receivers. Let’s examine their track record. Harvin. 1.5 games in a season . Sydney Rice. Never healthy. Nate Burlson. Never healthy. Deon Branch. Never healthy. Now they are looking a Finley. Yes this staff knows defense but has no clue on the passing game.

    • Craig

      You really know nothing about football, dont you Don? If you look at the tape, anyone could be put into Tate’s shoes and be successful. They’re a run first, pass second, beat you up offense, not a flashy one like Detroit. Did they get anywhere last year? Were they plagued by a freak season of injuries to star players? Yes, it happens. It’s the most physical sport around. Calvin Johnson and Julio Jones are a million times better than Tate, and they both missed significant time last seasons, just because injuries are part of the game. You do also realize that Russell looked for Baldwin when he was in trouble, right? Baldwin is more fundamentally sound, with the speed and athleticism to make him more dynamic than Tate. That’s why Sherm is so successful, he uses his head, same as Baldwin. My advice, watch the tape, there’s a reason why you’re not a professional analyst.