QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (1 Viewer)

[humpback]

Two things:

1. I didn't say he deserved a Mahomes deal, I pulled that out of air to make the point that most people who think Ravens should move on just think the Ravens should move on.

2. Where is Lamar's quote about wanting Watson guarantees?

1. Yes, and I made my comments because I think that is off base. I live in Ravens country, and the vast majority of fans want Lamar to be here but don't want to cripple the team to keep him. Sure, there are some who want him out of town no matter what, but that's a very small percentage.

2. Where is Lamar's quote that he doesn't want Watson guarantees? I get what you're saying, and earlier in this thread I said that we don't know the actual discussions and all we have to go on are rumors, but usually when there's smoke there's fire. Essentially we're all speculating in here as if the rumors are true, and while this certainly isn't proof, he allegedly told a reporter that he turned down between $160-$180 mil guaranteed.

Seems fair. Considering every new QB contract is better than the one before, seems reasonable to ask for the same.

I'm not sure it's equally reasonable to assume he will only take that deal, and the Ravens should move on, with two years of negotiating time in front of them, and an offence that is tailored to Lamar.

Not every new QB contract is better than the one before, especially when the one before looks completely unlike anything ever seen. Obviously there's a chance that it becomes the new norm, but it seems like a very small chance, even smaller for a QB who plays like Lamar.

Already addressed but the Ravens aren't thinking they have 2 years of negotiating time in front of them, not at those cap hit numbers. The offense being tailored isn't a big factor, they created that offense basically overnight and they can create a new one pretty quickly as well. Lots of rumors that their OC is on the outs either way as that offense has stunk even with Lamar.

 

[massraider]

we don't know the actual discussions and all we have to go on are rumors, but usually when there's smoke there's fire

I don't think this is much of an argument. We know Lamar's agent is not out there planting stories, so only one side is sending up smoke signals.

Not every new QB contract is better than the one before

At this level of QB play, franchise level, yes, they are better on a per year average.

Already addressed but the Ravens aren't thinking they have 2 years of negotiating time in front of them, not at those cap hit numbers. The offense being tailored isn't a big factor, they created that offense basically overnight and they can create a new one pretty quickly as well

Speculation on your part, or have the Ravens made an announcement that they will not franchise him twice?





They created that offense overnight?.........I have no comment on that.

 

[humpback]

I'm not sure this is true. Watson had multiple suitors, and he had a full no trade clause, so I'm sure they were all well aware of his contract demands while trying to deal for him. There seem to be plenty of teams desperate for franchise QB play that are more than willing to pay for it.

Who's to say Jackson can't get the exact same thing as he has far less baggage and arguably more NFL success.

This is a bit of a tangent but I don't think this is accurate. Houston reportedly drove the bus here and eliminated teams who didn't present a good enough offer to them before getting into all of contract talks.

I agree that there are multiple teams desperate for a franchise QB, but only one (so far) has given anything close to a fully guaranteed contract to one. Like I said, it's possible that this will be the new norm, but seems highly unlikely, especially for one with Lamar's playing style. That said, it's one of the big reasons why I think they've going to end up trading him- they won't give him that type of deal but that seems to be what he wants so if anyone else will he'll likely be gone.

Certainly has far less baggage but disagree that he's had more NFL success. Dude's a perv but on the field he is (was?) better than Lamar.

 

[humpback]

we don't know the actual discussions and all we have to go on are rumors, but usually when there's smoke there's fire

I don't think this is much of an argument. We know Lamar's agent is not out there planting stories, so only one side is sending up smoke signals.

Not every new QB contract is better than the one before

At this level of QB play, franchise level, yes, they are better on a per year average.

Already addressed but the Ravens aren't thinking they have 2 years of negotiating time in front of them, not at those cap hit numbers. The offense being tailored isn't a big factor, they created that offense basically overnight and they can create a new one pretty quickly as well

Speculation on your part, or have the Ravens made an announcement that they will not franchise him twice?





They created that offense overnight?.........I have no comment on that.

This is weird schtick- I've already acknowledged multiple times that we're all speculating in here, but if that doesn't work for you I guess we should just shut this thread down because none of us have the facts.

Of course the Ravens haven't "announced" that they will not franchise him twice because it would be ridiculously foolish for them to do so. Likewise, it would be ridiculously foolish to actually franchise him twice in a row and commit $100mil+ guaranteed over those 2 years when they *reportedly* wouldn't go much more than that over ~6 years. It would cripple their cap and that's not even accounting for Lamar's potential to hold out or his attitude, effort, etc. if they went that route.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree.

 

[Faust]

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports "no one truly knows" if Lamar Jackson (knee) will return for the Wild Card Round.​

For what it's worth, Rapsheet's competitor Adam Schefter reports Jackson has a "strong chance" of finally returning. Of course, Schefter adds Jackson is still dealing with "swelling." It's frankly easier to believe Rapsheet's report. It has been over a month since Jackson has practiced in any capacity. Rapsheet reports "Jackson's knee hasn't felt quite right, despite the work he's put in to try to get it feeling right, so he hasn't practiced." If Jackson does finally return, it's difficult to believe he will look like the Jackson we are used to seeing.
SOURCE: NFL Network
Jan 7, 2023, 3:50 PM ET

 

[Faust]

Source: 'Strong chance' Lamar Jackson back for playoffs

 

[The Man With No Name]

The salary cap will keep going up along with player contracts. Some players think more of themselves than teams do and more about money than winning. Sure, get all you can now, but if you can't live on and support your family for decades on xxxmillion something is wrong.

Salary cap for 2023 NFL season could exceed $220 million, but questions remain

The NFL's salary cap for the 2023 season could hit a record high of more than $220 million per club, according to NFL Network Insiders Tom Pelissero and Ian Rapoport.

www.nfl.com

 

[Tau837]

Bunch of people who don't depend on the Ravens winning games to keep their jobs are ready to move on from a winning QB.

It may be Lamar's choice to move on. The question has always been what are the Ravens willing to pay and what Lamar is willing to accept.

By all accounts this off-season Lamar wanted nothing less than the Deshaun deal and the Ravens, wouldn't do that. Let's see where they are in February.

If Lamar still wants the Deshaun deal then the Ravens probably would be wise to start laying the framework to move on from a winning QB.

IMO it is a problem for Jackson attempting to use any of the recent mega deals for QBs as precedent, since every one of those teams likely already regrets those deals - Denver (Wilson), Cleveland (Watson), Arizona (Murray). I doubt any of those teams would give those QBs the same contract again if they could do it over. IMO that informs Baltimore's stance on using a precedent like the Watson deal.

I certainly would not give Jackson the deal that he apparently demands in order to sign.

He has likely already peaked as a runner, and he is not a franchise-level passer. As a passer, he had one great season, 2019, and one good season, 2020. His passing has been below average for the past two seasons. He is 1-3 in the playoffs, and it seems unlikely he will improve that record this postseason, if he even plays.

In addition to all that, he has acted as his own agent, which seems to have made negotiations more difficult. Jackson seems to have failed to grasp that the Ravens tailored their offensive scheme and personnel around his fairly unique skill set. He can't just go to any team and have the same thing, at least not immediately. He should have been motivated to make a deal work with the Ravens, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

IMO the Ravens are less likely to win another Super Bowl in the next decade if they agree to a contract Jackson will accept than if they let him go and deal with having to find another QB.

There are differences between franchises. Baltimore is a franchise with organizational leadership and strong coaching, which puts it in the position to contend for a Super Bowl when things break right. Not every franchise has that capability. So it is more okay for a franchise like the Browns to handicap itself with a ridiculous QB contract like Watson's, because they really aren't a contender one way or the other. That isn't the case with the Ravens. Apples and oranges.

 

[Dizzy]

Bunch of people who don't depend on the Ravens winning games to keep their jobs are ready to move on from a winning QB.

It may be Lamar's choice to move on. The question has always been what are the Ravens willing to pay and what Lamar is willing to accept.

By all accounts this off-season Lamar wanted nothing less than the Deshaun deal and the Ravens, wouldn't do that. Let's see where they are in February.

If Lamar still wants the Deshaun deal then the Ravens probably would be wise to start laying the framework to move on from a winning QB.

IMO it is a problem for Jackson attempting to use any of the recent mega deals for QBs as precedent, since every one of those teams likely already regrets those deals - Denver (Wilson), Cleveland (Watson), Arizona (Murray). I doubt any of those teams would give those QBs the same contract again if they could do it over. IMO that informs Baltimore's stance on using a precedent like the Watson deal.

I certainly would not give Jackson the deal that he apparently demands in order to sign.

He has likely already peaked as a runner, and he is not a franchise-level passer. As a passer, he had one great season, 2019, and one good season, 2020. His passing has been below average for the past two seasons. He is 1-3 in the playoffs, and the team seems likely to miss the playoffs for the second straight season this year, in large part due to Jackson missing games due to injury.

In addition to all that, he has acted as his own agent, which seems to have made negotiations more difficult. Jackson seems to have failed to grasp that the Ravens tailored their offensive scheme and personnel around his fairly unique skill set. He can't just go to any team and have the same thing, at least not immediately. He should have been motivated to make a deal work with the Ravens, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

IMO the Ravens are less likely to win another Super Bowl in the next decade if they agree to a contract Jackson will accept than if they let him go and deal with having to find another QB.

There are differences between franchises. Baltimore is a franchise with organizational leadership and strong coaching, which puts it in the position to contend for a Super Bowl when things break right. Not every franchise has that capability. So it is more okay for a franchise like the Browns to handicap itself with a ridiculous QB contract like Watson's, because they really aren't a contender one way or the other. That isn't the case with the Ravens. Apples and oranges.

I'm in agreement here. I think the Ravens will take this off season - that's likely coming sooner than later - and evaluate the risk/reward of catering a unique offense to a unique QB.

We have already seen what happens when Lamar is not on the field. The "pro Lamar" team would argue that this shows just how valuable he is to the success of the team. The anti-Lamar crowd however would argue that it has proven impossible to have an effective back-up QB that can run the same offense when Lamar is not available.

And to your point - what if Lamar can't be "Lamar" when (if) he returns? What if his best RB days are behind him? It's going to happen. Has he shown the ability to develop as a pocket passer and an evaluator of defenses, or is he Cam Newton?

 

[menobrown]

IMO it is a problem for Jackson attempting to use any of the recent mega deals for QBs as precedent, since every one of those teams likely already regrets those deals - Denver (Wilson), Cleveland (Watson), Arizona (Murray). I doubt any of those teams would give those QBs the same contract again if they could do it over.

I look at this differently then you.

For one I believe Cleveland would give Watson that deal again if that's what it took to acquire him.

The other two I agree those teams wish they had not but I'd also mention that both of them took some criticism by some for not coming in after Watson and also getting full guarantees.

And I believe that's the holding pattern now and I know there was some debate on it in this thread but I think Baltimore did offer him a mega contract, but unlike the other two Lamar wants more guarantees.

The only real question has things from this past few weeks soured Baltimore to point they don't want to give Lamar a mega deal anymore? I don't think so but I've seen at least one report from a long time Ravens beat writer they were not happy with Lamar's rehab, the way he was attacking it. Multiple reports that Harbaugh has grown frustrated with the entire situation and a belief that Lamar is protecting himself(which is understandable and in theory would likely not be the case if his deal was fully guaranteed).

I feel like I know for certain that Baltimore is never going to budge and give him a Watson type of deal. Other then that I don't know what will happen.

 

[Chaka]

IMO it is a problem for Jackson attempting to use any of the recent mega deals for QBs as precedent, since every one of those teams likely already regrets those deals - Denver (Wilson), Cleveland (Watson), Arizona (Murray). I doubt any of those teams would give those QBs the same contract again if they could do it over. IMO that informs Baltimore's stance on using a precedent like the Watson deal.

I am not sure I agree with any of this. I doubt Cleveland regrets their acquisition of Watson for sure. Murray is still entering his prime and I believe Kingsbury is as much a regret for the Cardinals FO if not more. Any coaching candidate would love the opportunity to see what they could accomplish with Murray at QB.

Wilson can mostly agree with but I also think it is premature to discount him entirely. If they acquire Payton, and IMO the smart money says they will, I think we will see Wilson earn his contract.

And, with all of these contracts their impact lessens every year as the salary cap rises.

 

[massraider]

Definitely teams are going to avoid the big deals moving forward.

I think the best plan is draft a franchise QB, get 5 years out of him, win a Super Bowl or two, let some other team sign your franchise QB (SUCKERZ!!!) then draft another franchise QB, who will be on a rookie deal for 5 years (PROFIT!) where you are able to build a stacked roster because your QB only makes 12 mill a season.

Chiefs were dumb for extending Mahomes, should have drafted Jalen Hurts, they'd be sitting pretty. And I don't know what the Bills are thinking, Josh Allen about to be a major anchor on that salary cap.

 

[Tau837]

Definitely teams are going to avoid the big deals moving forward.

I think the best plan is draft a franchise QB, get 5 years out of him, win a Super Bowl or two, let some other team sign your franchise QB (SUCKERZ!!!) then draft another franchise QB, who will be on a rookie deal for 5 years (PROFIT!) where you are able to build a stacked roster because your QB only makes 12 mill a season.

Chiefs were dumb for extending Mahomes, should have drafted Jalen Hurts, they'd be sitting pretty. And I don't know what the Bills are thinking, Josh Allen about to be a major anchor on that salary cap.

Poor strawman.

I haven't noticed anyone in this thread saying it never makes sense to give a huge contract to a franchise QB. A number of people have posted that it doesn't make sense to give Jackson such a contract. I assume you realize those are two different things.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Definitely teams are going to avoid the big deals moving forward.

I think the best plan is draft a franchise QB, get 5 years out of him, win a Super Bowl or two, let some other team sign your franchise QB (SUCKERZ!!!) then draft another franchise QB, who will be on a rookie deal for 5 years (PROFIT!) where you are able to build a stacked roster because your QB only makes 12 mill a season.

Chiefs were dumb for extending Mahomes, should have drafted Jalen Hurts, they'd be sitting pretty. And I don't know what the Bills are thinking, Josh Allen about to be a major anchor on that salary cap.

Poor strawman.

I haven't noticed anyone in this thread saying it never makes sense to give a huge contract to a franchise QB. A number of people have posted that it doesn't make sense to give Jackson such a contract. I assume you realize those are two different things.

I think you missed the deadpan sarcasm from a raiders fan

 

[massraider]

. I assume you realize those are two different things

You assume incorrect

 

[The_Man]

Adding to the speculation in Baltimore is that NFL rules require an owner to place the full amount of $ offered in a guaranteed contract into escrow until it’s paid out and there is a feeling that Biscotti has no interest (and maybe not the ability) in parking +/- $250 million into escrow

 

[zeeshan2]

[Pat McAfee]”Lamar Jackson has told people he’ll be back but people who have watched him aren’t so sure” ~ @RapSheet #PMSOverreactionMonday

 

[Faust]

Ravens QB Lamar Jackson (knee) faces an uphill battle to play vs. Bengals

 

[Godsbrother]

If I am the Bengals I am preparing for Jackson to play.

I don't see much of a chance for Huntley (hurt) or Brown beating them unless the Bengals offense loses the turnover battle in a big way.

 

[Grahamburn]

I'd trade him to Carolina for 3 1st's and let them pay him.

 

[Grahamburn]

. I assume you realize those are two different things

You assume incorrect

So you're saying Mahomes/Allen = Jackson?

Edit: I'll say I think a team will give Jackson the deal he wants. That doesn't mean they should. So, from Jackson's perspective I think he's smart to force a trade. I don't think an organization would be smart do do it, which is why Baltimore isn't. They're smart.

 

[massraider]

So you're saying Mahomes/Allen = Jackson?

I'm saying I don't think a lot of these opinions are rooted in reality, or any facts. I think people are making massive assumptions about what's happening with Lamar and the team. I think the lack of an agent leaking stuff to PFT is really skewing the opinions.

I think people are really quick to let a former MVP QB walk, and have maybe played a bit too much Madden Franchise mode. Everyone involved with this franchise is very aware of how tenuous coaching/front office NFL careers are. I think the Ravens can take a look at Indy, a team that was ready for the playoffs, just needed a QB. Five years later.......

 

[Uruk-Hai]

So you're saying Mahomes/Allen = Jackson?

I'm saying I don't think a lot of these opinions are rooted in reality, or any facts. I think people are making massive assumptions about what's happening with Lamar and the team. I think the lack of an agent leaking stuff to PFT is really skewing the opinions.

I think people are really quick to let a former MVP QB walk, and have maybe played a bit too much Madden Franchise mode. Everyone involved with this franchise is very aware of how tenuous coaching/front office NFL careers are. I think the Ravens can take a look at Indy, a team that was ready for the playoffs, just needed a QB. Five years later.......

I follow the Ravens and, if you had asked me this time last year, I'd have put a re-signing at close to 100%.

I can tell you this: Baltimore owner Steve Bisciotti was royally pissed about the Browns/Watson contract. I think he knew what was coming.

I don't want Jackson to leave. He's the most fun (& one of the best) players they've had. They can win with him, but he's got to stay on the field.

They're gonna franchise him. After that, who knows? They may trade him, or at least listen to offers. He may hold out and force a trade. Or he may play out next year under the tag and see what happens. I think, if they had their choice, the Ravens would love to keep him.

 

[menobrown]

I'm saying I don't think a lot of these opinions are rooted in reality, or any facts. I think people are making massive assumptions about what's happening with Lamar and the team. I think the lack of an agent leaking stuff to PFT is really skewing the opinions.

Why do you think Lamar has not signed?

I think people are really quick to let a former MVP QB walk, and have maybe played a bit too much Madden Franchise mode

This talk or speculation that trading him is possible is coming from several people who played real GM in the NFL.

 

[zeeshan2]

[Schultz] Lamar Jackson is still dealing with “extreme swelling” and remains “pretty limited,” a source tells @theScore. I’m told this has nothing to do with his contract either.

 

[massraider]

They're gonna franchise him. After that, who knows?

This is my opinion as well.

What I am seeing in this thread is a bunch of opinions/speculation that have become accepted as fact.

I think every owner not named Haslem is upset about that deal.

But every good QB is gonna ask for a Watson deal, and NFL owners are going to have to figure it out. The Ravens will be among the first to try and figure it out.

 

[massraider]

Why do you think Lamar has not signed?

Because the Ravens have been lowballing him, and are asking for his salary to be tied to games played.



I just pulled that statement directly from my @##, and it as valid as any opinion I'm reading here.

 

[menobrown]

Because the Ravens have been lowballing him, and are asking for his salary to be tied to games played.

Ok thank for answering and that's all fine with me but seems a bit odd you think it's ok to speculate and put the blame on the Ravens but seem to be critical of all of us who speculate the Ravens have been fair and/or just don't want to get into Watson type guarantees.

You've mentioned the lack of an agent a few times and that's odd to me as well you seem to be of the opinion without an agent pushing out selective information that puts his client in the best light we should not speculate the Ravens are being fair but it's ok to speculate they are not.

Personally I will speculate and I'm firmly of the belief the Ravens have been willing to put him at the very top of the APY for QB's, have not tied anything into games played, but want to structure the deal in such a way that they have an out after likely no more then 3 seasons. Which to me is fair. They are holding firm, as is Lamar, and at a point if an agreement can't be reached I think it's only reasonable as we've reached franchise tag status for the team to start pursuing the trade option, which I feel pretty sure is not their preferred choice but what they might ultimately conclude is the best course of action and something I think is possible this off-season if not this off-season will happen next off-season is a long term is not reached.

 

[massraider]

Ok thank for answering and that's all fine with me but seems a bit odd you think it's ok to speculate and put the blame on the Ravens but seem to be critical of all of us who speculate the Ravens have been fair and/or just don't want to get into Watson type guarantees.

I don't actually believe that. I was pointing out that my speculation is rooted in as much fact as all this OTHER speculation.

His lack of an agent has been brought up by many others, for years. PFT for sure, and listen, all NFL rumors and contract data we get, that all comes from agents. Schefter and PFT are beholden to the agents, they need to keep them happy. So if PFT says that Lamar's lack of an agent is a big problem, I keep it in my mind that they might getting out a message that the agents want them to broadcast. Doesn't mean they are wrong, but conflict of interest and al that.

 

[menobrown]

Ok thank for answering and that's all fine with me but seems a bit odd you think it's ok to speculate and put the blame on the Ravens but seem to be critical of all of us who speculate the Ravens have been fair and/or just don't want to get into Watson type guarantees.

I don't actually believe that. I was pointing out that my speculation is rooted in as much fact as all this OTHER speculation.

His lack of an agent has been brought up by many others, for years. PFT for sure, and listen, all NFL rumors and contract data we get, that all comes from agents. Schefter and PFT are beholden to the agents, they need to keep them happy. So if PFT says that Lamar's lack of an agent is a big problem, I keep it in my mind that they might getting out a message that the agents want them to broadcast. Doesn't mean they are wrong, but conflict of interest and al that.

All fair and I don't actually pay any attention to PFT, try to avoid every so much as clicking on their link.

I do listen to Mike Lombardi a lot. He loves Lamar. Always has. I think his son was on the Lousiville staff when they had Lamar and back in the year he was drafted Lombardi railed against him going so late. He has brought up his lack of agent as being an issue and said it actually complicates things for the Ravens more then Lamar but he has mentioned a few times there is a PR element of not having an agent that would at times serve Lamar well. I am of the opinion if Lamar had an agent the odds of him extended already would have increased.

But to me that's all beside the point. He does not have an agent, they can't agree on terms, and if that still can't agree this off-season I think they have to start exploring other options. My best guess on the outcome is they will franchise him for 2023 and if no deal is reached in next offseason he's going to get traded. This is not only what I think but what I would do if I was them, but not without seeing if someone blows me away this offseason.

 

[humpback]

So you're saying Mahomes/Allen = Jackson?

I'm saying I don't think a lot of these opinions are rooted in reality, or any facts. I think people are making massive assumptions about what's happening with Lamar and the team. I think the lack of an agent leaking stuff to PFT is really skewing the opinions.

I think people are really quick to let a former MVP QB walk, and have maybe played a bit too much Madden Franchise mode. Everyone involved with this franchise is very aware of how tenuous coaching/front office NFL careers are. I think the Ravens can take a look at Indy, a team that was ready for the playoffs, just needed a QB. Five years later.......

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves.

I think the Ravens are one of the very best organizations in the entire NFL, and they're looking at Denver, Arizona, and Cleveland and saying "not gonna happen here".

 

[massraider]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

 

[JoeJoe88]

I'd trade him to Carolina for 3 1st's and let them pay him.

Oof. I’d rather just draft Richardson at 9 and let him sit for 12 games.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I'm calling it here and now.
Lamar has played his last game in Baltimore.

 

[Obie Wan]

I'm calling it here and now.
Lamar has played his last game in Baltimore.

they'll trade him for a ransom
then trade for Fields to run the same offense

 

[humpback]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

 

[zamboni]

I'm calling it here and now.
Lamar has played his last game in Baltimore.

You're not the only one saying this - seems to be more sentiment behind this with every game he's missed.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

 

[Anarchy99]

I'm calling it here and now.
Lamar has played his last game in Baltimore.

they'll trade him for a ransom
then trade for Fields to run the same offense

If a team had an interest in Lamar, why not have similar interest in Fields? Fields would not cost as much in a trade, and certainly not in a contract. He would be on a team friendly rookie deal for two more seasons, would have the 5th year option, and then an additional two years under the franchise tag. That's five years of team control for Fields with no upfront money or long term guarantees in any of that.

Lamar would cost a ton in draft capital, likely would refuse to be a good soldier without getting a massive new contract with likely $100M paid out in 2023 between signing bonus and first year salary, not to mention having another $100 million guaranteed. The only way he could be traded would be to initially agree to be franchised and sign the tender.

That being said, I doubt the Bears will trade Fields, and if they can get a king's ransom for the #1 overall pick, I think they would be more inclined to trade the pick than Fields.

 

[massraider]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

People are literally mad at Lamar, because of Jimmy Haslem.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

People are literally mad at Lamar, because of Jimmy Haslem.

Yeah, I don't get it. I'd shoot the moon, too, if I were Jackson. Devil's in the details, though, because Bisciotti isn't a dummy.

 

[Faust]

Lamar Jackson's extended absence creates more contract issues with Ravens, and both sides brought this on

 

[zeeshan2]

[Lamar Jackson] Thank you everyone for your support and concerns regarding my injuries. I want to give you all an update as I am in the recovery process. I’ve suffered a PCL grade 2 sprain on the borderline of a strain 3. There is still inflammation surrounding my knee…

 

[humpback]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

You missed some backstory- massraider thinks without direct quotes from Lamar stating what he wants we shouldn't speculate. At least until he feels like speculating.

For one, Bracie has argued in here that he should be the highest paid QB multiple times.

 

[humpback]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

People are literally mad at Lamar, because of Jimmy Haslem.

You're a big fan of strawmen. No one is mad at Lamar for asking, heck, I don't think many are "mad" at Lamar at all. I know I'm not, he can choose to do whatever he wants, more power to him. I'm simply saying that Watson's deal is highly unlike any other and shouldn't be expected to be the floor for every QB deal going forward. It was a one-off deal from a terrible, desperate franchise, and if Lamar had an agent I think he would've been able to convince Lamar of that and a deal would have been made last offseason.

There are much better comps out there for Lamar's contract, and *reportedly* their offers were in that neighborhood. Again, if he insists on the moon that's fine, the Ravens should deal him away for a haul and move on.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Funny, I think it's the exact opposite. IMO it's more the "pay him whatever he wants" crowd that has been playing too much Madden, mesmerized by his razzle dazzle spin moves

I haven't seen this sentiment. Are you seeing a lot of people arguing for a fully guaranteed deal? I'm not.

Are you saying that he wants a fully guaranteed deal?

There have been plenty of people that have said that he deserves to get a top of the market contract including guarantees, some in this very thread.

Of course Jackson wants a fully-guaranteed deal. Wouldn't you?

I have seen NO ONE say he should get a Watson deal. Some guarantee is normal.

My take has been that QB contracts leap-frog each other. Whoever is next up may jump a guy who's better than he is, but it's been going that way for years.

You missed some backstory- massraider thinks without direct quotes from Lamar stating what he wants we shouldn't speculate. At least until he feels like speculating.

For one, Bracie has argued in here that he should be the highest paid QB multiple times.

APY, he might have been since he's the next one up. Just like Burrow & Herbert & Hurts will eclipse THAT when their time comes. Whether any of them "should" be at the top of the salary mountain is beside the point. I don't think the total contract value or the per year average was the problem - I think it was the guarantee, which is why the Ravens were dismayed by Watson's contract.

 

[kface]

deal him...the ravens will be better off without him

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Go a lil past the 15:00 minute mark for pertinent information on what the Ravens HAVE to do with other contracts if they want to tag and trade Lamar.
It is a bit more complicated than many assume unless he caves and signs a long-term deal with the Ravens which doesn't seem plausible.
For a tag-and-trade deal to happen they have to sign Lamar to an EXCLUSIVE tag and for that to happen they need to be under the cap by March 15.
If the Ravens tag him to a NON EXCLUSIVE deal then the 'best' they could hope for is 2 first round draft picks if another team trades for him but even if the Ravens decide on a NON EXCLUSIVE tag they lose all negotiating power. Lamar is worth more than 2 first round picks so they would almost certainly tag him with an EXCLUSIVE tag which means the Raven need to be UNDER the cap before March 15 in order for a tag-and-trade to happen.

Look for a lot of Raven contracts to be tweaked before March 15.
-----------------------------------------
PODCAST: Roquan deal impact on Lamar

 

[humpback]

APY, he might have been since he's the next one up. Just like Burrow & Herbert & Hurts will eclipse THAT when their time comes. Whether any of them "should" be at the top of the salary mountain is beside the point. I don't think the total contract value or the per year average was the problem - I think it was the guarantee, which is why the Ravens were dismayed by Watson's contract.

I mean, whether he "should" be at the top of the mountain is kind of the whole point, it's what we've been debating in here since the offseason. It also seems to be what the impasse is about- he feels like he should be at the top while the Ravens feel he should be near the top, *reportedly*. When talking about what the "top" is, opinions may vary- it can be some combination of overall value, per year value, and guaranteed value, but when comparing with Watson specifically, it's easy since his is the only one that is fully guaranteed. That seems to be what some people (including Lamar) want to use as a baseline.

It isn't is simple as every QB contract is bigger than the last. Mahomes still has by far the largest overall deal and he signed his before all of the other big time guys. Rodgers has the highest APY and he signed before Watson, Murray, Wilson, Stafford, and Carr. Watson has the highest guaranteed and he signed before Stafford, Carr, Murray and Wilson. So while clearly the trend is for contracts to get larger with time, there are other factors besides next contract=bigger.

I agree, in my opinion the impasse is much more about the guarantees than anything else, but we really don't know since we aren't privy to the negotiations. I've been saying that there's no way I'd pay him a contract close to fully guaranteed money like Watson's, nor would I give him the largest overall (Mahomes) or per year (Rodgers). Others disagree.

 

[zeeshan2]

[@RapSheet] #Ravens coach John Harbaugh on Lamar Jackson's tweet: "No, I didn't know anything about that and didn't pay much attention to." Also says he can't comment on the specifics of Jackson's injury.