A Leonard Williams Contract Idea That Works for Both Sides

Seahawks should borrow plan from Rams to keep Williams happy and in Seattle

The Seattle Seahawks don’t have that many contract situations to hammer out before the end of the year, but the one that could matter the most in terms of 2027 is the deal for fine-wine-aging Leonard Williams. Entering the last year of the contract he signed in 2024, Williams should be looking to secure his financial future beyond this upcoming season, and the Seahawks would be wise to settle his situation now, rather than wait.

Perhaps the best move would be to just make sure that 2026 stops being a contract year, so that everyone can focus on repeating as Super Bowl winners, not wondering what will happen next year.

With training camp on the horizon, the weekly Super Joes Q&A sessions are back. If you want to submit your own Seahawks questions or hot takes or suggestions, upgrade to Super Joes today. It’s just $5 more per month than the Regular Joes subscription:

Grant: I'm more curious now about how you think the Seahawks should/will handle an extension for Leonard Williams. Is it more likely that a deal gets done this preseason, during the season, or next offseason? What do you think realistic extension should look like?

Nobody else on the Seahawks holds all the cards like Leonard Williams holds all the cards.

It really just depends on what he wants to do because Williams has every right to ask for the same contract as Chris Jones (5 years, $158 million, fairly debilitating), especially after taking a substantial discount on his last contract. Or Williams may think, “I know what it’s like to play for the Jets and the Giants” and be too happy in Seattle to leave or weaken the roster with a contract like that.

Williams, the top-ranked interior defensive lineman by ESPN’s league survey this year, is only the 13th-highest paid at the position. That’s mostly just due to defensive tackles signing after him, but he’s still about $10 million per year below his market value, and apparently he has an expensive plants habit that he needs to fund.

There is a way for both sides to win.

Similar to what Matthew Stafford has been doing with the Rams recently, Williams could opt to go year-to-year with the Seahawks rather than signing a long-term deal that could he be his last. Williams signed a three-year, $63 million contract in 2024:

He has two void years (2027-2028) on the deal, meaning that Seattle was able to spread out his signing bonus over five seasons instead of three. That leaves a $9.4 million cap hit in 2027 despite Williams not being signed.

Why not borrow from the Bengals after they signed Dexter Lawrence (coincidentally a former teammate of Williams) to a one-year, $28 million extension? The Seahawks wouldn’t have to pay it all at once. In fact, they could keep kicking some money down the road by going year-to-year with Williams, and then if he feels like he’s lost some juice in a year or two, the Seahawks won’t be saddled with some exorbitant cap hit for a 34 year old. Chris Jones has cap hits of $45 and $38 million in 2026 and 2027!

The benefit to Williams is that if he has another great season, he can ask for way more next year and get more money upfront than he would ever get on a long-term deal.

So those are the two BEST options (not most likely) I see:

• Williams wants to stay, so sign him to an extension this month

• Williams wants to get the most money possible, so what’s the rush?

Schneider has rarely, if ever, lost free agents that the Seahawks want to keep. So Seattle shouldn’t feel pressed to give into a four-year, $124 million contract, if that’s the type of deal Williams wants. There is no deadline to sign a player to an extension. But if his goal is to stay in Seattle, and from all outward appearances it is, then I think an extension is close. And the best possible outcome would be going year-to-year.

Maxx: What has motivated Vinod Khosla, who's not only a lifelong 49ers fan but also part team owner, to sell off that ownership and shell out so much money for the team that is a chief rival of his lifelong favorite team?

I understand about giving him a chance, and having the NFL approve the sale before it's official. And if the speculation about his son running the show comes true, then what? How much meddling will it take for JS to say "I'm outta here?" Maybe it's too unsubstantiated speculation, but did he buy the Seahawks to screw them up so the 49ers can beat them? Because they certainly can't now. Maybe I am overreacting and everything will be fine and the team will continue to thrive. I just can't get rid of this nagging feeling. Ken, am I overreacting??

Well, he probably bought the Seahawks because they were for sale and the 49ers aren’t for sale and won’t be for sale during his lifetime. He also probably sold his stake in the 49ers to buy the Seahawks because he wants his family to own an NFL franchise, not just a small piece of one, in order to make even more money. And he probably wants his son Neal Khosla to help run the team under controlling owner Neela Khosla, because Vinod is 71 and his son is, presumably, younger than him.

If one is rich enough to buy a professional sports franchise of any kind, be it a $10 billion NFL team or a minor league baseball team, it is logical that they have the goal for their new asset to be successful and win games. It is illogical to sabotage that $10 billion investment because you’re motivated by a wacky fantasy to help your favorite team.

It’s funny how easily we ignore the fact that virtually every player on the Seahawks was once a fan of some other NFL team (probably a diehard fan) prior to joining the Seahawks, and now their only goal is to help the Seahawks win. This would be the case for almost every professional athlete in a team sport. I doubt it works any differently for owners and GMs.

I hate to say it, but if I found out that I was the long lost heir to some NFL franchise that wasn’t the Seahawks and I became an owner of that team overnight, I would instantly be trying to help that team win a Super Bowl so that I could win a Super Bowl. Also know as the plot of Little Big League.

I can’t say you’re overreacting, but it’s far more logical that this is yet another case of a billionaire living out a fantasy life and proving he (and his wife and his son) can be the best at something, and not that his dream is to lose to his old team.

IdahoFred: What should we expect for a first-time offensive coordinator? Like what are the more-or -less success rates and who have been the better ones? I know there are a lot of head coaches that were OC's but how good are they when they step on the field the first time?

It’s a good question, just generally thinking in terms of what the life and career experience would be like for a coach who just got promoted to an offensive coordinator role for the first time. A Netflix docuseries about Brian Fleury would be interesting, but only if the show could be transparent, which it never would be in a million years.

As a question I could actually answer, I find that impossible. Even if I were clever enough to know how to begin to research the history of success of first-time offensive coordinators (think of all the immeasurable variables in the equation alone, like knowing how much credit to give Eric Bieniemy vs. Patrick Mahomes vs. Andy Reid), I don’t think it would help us set expectations for Fleury’s first season.

If Sean McVay had the 24th-ranked offense with Washington in 2014, does that mean that Fleury will have the 24th-ranked offense in 2026?

We, as fans, also spend way too much time crediting coordinators for success and blaming them for failure. All too often, yesterday’s “guru” is in tomorrow’s unemployment line. Klint Kubiak didn’t even have that many teams calling him about an OC job a year ago, and then he links up with the Seahawks and become a hot commodity for HC jobs despite using all of the same tricks as before.

So if someone writes a book or makes a documentary about the job, I’ll read it or I’ll watch it. In terms of how good we should expect Fleury to be, we’ll have to accept not knowing, and that’s really true of most teams at most times.

Scott M: ESPN put out their list of top players at each position. Let's talk about tight ends shall we. Where is AJ Barner? Not in top 10? Not in just missed the cut? Not even in honorable mentions? You're telling me he's not anywhere in the top half of the league? Kenneth, can you set them straight please?

I’ve always heard that scouts and coaches vehemently disagree on players. ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler is gathering intel on players from coaches, scouts, and execs, and then combining their answers to make a list? It doesn’t really make any sense.

Short answer: ESPN is doing it wrong.

Fowler should show us how each separate groups rank players and then let us decide whether we agree with coaches, scouts, or execs. I would think coaches are much higher on Barner than scouts, maybe, and that could be bringing down his score. We have no idea how balanced these surveys even are in terms of how many people he’s talking to from each group.

Rusty: What one player do you think is most primed for a breakout season and why?

There are so many potential ways to answer that question, whether it’s a player who goes from 0 to 50, or from 50 to 75, or from 75 to 100. I’ve been on the record for Byron Murphy II as a Defensive Player of the Year candidate, but he’s also already great. Or A.J. Barner as a tight end who could get 800-1,000 yards. Was last year his breakout?

Even an older player like Rashid Shaheed could be a breakout candidate.

I’ll go with Derick Hall, as he’s in a position to see an increased role given the current situation at outside linebacker with DeMarcus Lawrence potentially playing fewer snaps, or taking snaps away from Uchenna Nwosu. That, plus the team’s show of faith in Hall with a new contract, primes Seattle to take advantage of his contract as a “discount” if he can be put in a lot more favorable pass rushing situations next season.

I’m sure so many names are running through your head right now as you’re reading this, whoever you are, from Rylie Mills to Jadarian Price, so I’ll let you tell me:

Ray: FIFA has proved we can have a real grass field in Luman. What are the odds of that happening during “Football” season?

Wanting to change the field at Lumen is not a campaign that I’ve been aware of, so just consider me naive perhaps. What’s wrong with the turf? What happens in Seattle seems to be working out pretty well for Seattle.

Seaside Joe 2690