Yes, it does, and it is certainly a more preferable and egalitarian parting of ways that is (probably) often true.
Wilson's record of failure these past couple of years, however, tell a very different story. In his final season in Seattle, even his own teammates had become disillusioned with him, claiming he "
checked out" and there were allegations of his open resistance to team leadership. Sounds like he "didn't agree" with their offensive (mostly running) strategy (read: not many QB-focused passing games to make him look the hero to his preening fans). Not a good look to maintain team morale and cohesion by any metric.
While some folks can make a comeback after moving to different clubs (and a case can admittedly be made for this in general - look at Andy Reid and, briefly, Tom Brady as textbook examples), I am curious how common an occurrence such scenery-changing turn-around's are in reality compared to resulting
failures. The latter of which is rarely discussed by anyone, because it doesn't make for good ESPN headlines, save the occasional epic flame-out when a troubled player does something supremely dumb that's caught on camera somewhere.
If I was a recruiter looking for a starting QB, I would
never have picked Wilson with his downhill record. And if I was forced to by upper-management to do so, I certainly would
not have advocated such an absurdly imbalanced team-future-sacrificing deal like they one they penned for him before he even played a single second of regulation time! And now, even if they do wind up letting him go before team practice starts up this summer, they're still on the hook to pay Wilson tens of millions of dollars for having done absolutely nothing. Someone didn't do their homework with this one...
