massraider
Footballguy
It smells like that, but we can't say for sure, and no one will ever prove it, so....
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter massraider
- Start date
InDitkaWeTrust
Footballguy
Fields for Lamar+ would be one of, if not THE, dumbest things Chicago could do. They have many, many more pressing needs than upgrade at QB.
Tau837
Footballguy
If he wants to sign a multi-year contract, whether with the Ravens or any other team, he must sign it by July 17.
From that same link, a player must sign his franchise tag in order to be traded. So the practical deadline for him to sign is likely a bit earlier than July 17.
-OZ-
Footballguy
I might agree. But keep in mind the bears must spend money. And maybe they get something with Lamar?
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
If the Bears want to spend money they could get their current QB some recievers and another offensive lineman.
I we are all hanging out at the grand canyon and a dude jumps off a cliff.... are we colluding if nobody goes running off the cliff after him?
Last edited:
Tau837
Footballguy
I thought these reports were all from the media, not statements from the teams. Did I misunderstand that? I realize that the media are likely getting this info from team sources, but your quote here seems to be more definitively about official team statements.
How good were these metrics for 2020-2022, taking out his MVP season that occurred 4 seasons ago? Without looking it up, he obviously has not been as good at any passing metrics in the past 3 seasons as he was in 2019. IMO that is an underrated factor in all of the discussion around the situation.
IMO it is unsupportable to suggest this is about race. Since 2020, these QBs all signed huge contracts:
Mahomes
Wilson
Murray
Watson
Prescott
Geno
Hurts will be signing another big one this offseason.
Lamar himself is almost certainly going to sign a huge contract, just not with all of the terms he wants.
How could it possibly be about race?
I think the problem for the Ravens is that the market for Lamar has gone up simply because he's an elite QB who deserves to sign the market deal for 2023 elite QBs. IMO, contracts from 2021 and 2022 shouldn't cut it. Jackson deserves to paid right there with Burrow/Hurts/Herbert. That right there puts him closer to the Watson guaranteed money.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
We understand that Jackson can now sit back and watch at least 2-3 QBs-Burrow, Hurts, Herbert, all will be extended and I bet most of them see at least Murray range for their contract.
Meanwhile Jackson can watch all that take place and by that time at least one team is going to get the urge.
Fans will be wondering why their owners were interested in Watson and all his off field problems but not Lamar Jackson
The Miami Dolphins should run to sign him if no one else does immediately after the Draft.
The Dolphins name keeps coming up but media pundits fail to remember Miami doesn't have a '231st Rd pick. We lost one due to owner and traded the other.
Jackson can play this out slowly and after free agency, cap restructuring, the Draft, somebody is going to want to be a Super Bowl favorite.
Miami has a 1,700 yd WR and a 1,300 yd WR and they had RBs that were averaging 4.5-5 yds a clip, this team just needs a playmaker at QB.
Last edited:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
It’s not. Ironically the only person talking about race is the one lamenting people making it about race.
Hopefully people ignore it and discuss the football aspects.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
That's good info. That would put the window right after the Draft, Mid June which also works with all those June 1st cuts for cap purposes, might be of help to some teams.
IMO
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
"White Owners"
-ESPN, part of ABC/Disney, kind of a big company and outlet I hear
keep the
going
massraider
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/1633498787049086979?t=Ga1eDU8JQKLN1z7kk3pC8Q&s=19
Schefter on Lamar. His point is that if teams get Lamar to agree to a deal, maybe BAL just matches it, and they don't want to do the work for them.
That makes sense, especially if Lamar would prefer to stay in BAL, which I think he does.
I get what Schefter is saying, but there might be two trades for QB in the draft that have higher price tags than two #1 picks, is it really that much work to negotiate a deal? Maybe BAL doesn't match, and you get him for less than what some team pays for an unknown at QB.
Schefter on Lamar. His point is that if teams get Lamar to agree to a deal, maybe BAL just matches it, and they don't want to do the work for them.
That makes sense, especially if Lamar would prefer to stay in BAL, which I think he does.
I get what Schefter is saying, but there might be two trades for QB in the draft that have higher price tags than two #1 picks, is it really that much work to negotiate a deal? Maybe BAL doesn't match, and you get him for less than what some team pays for an unknown at QB.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
"White Owners"
-ESPN, part of ABC/Disney, kind of a big company and outlet I hear
keep the
So it bothered you so much, but yet you perpetuate in this thread?
This cake tastes like crap. Here taste it!
Plenty of places to spend money. Sign Kaleb McGary or Mike McGlinchey at RT, sign Jamel Dean at CB, sign Marcus Davenport at DE, maybe sign Juan Thornhill if Eddie Jackson is a cap casualty, sign Damien Harris if you don't fully trust Khalil Herbert. I'd rather see a WR added in the draft, but if they do sign a guy, I think it should be someone with slot value. Maybe a guy like Robert Woods or Jarvis Landry on the cheap as a WR3?
Adding Lamar makes it a lot harder to do those things, they could still do some, and might only be a slight upgrade.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I’m talking about in this thread.- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.www.youtube.com
Don't take MoP's word for it, let's hear what RC has to say
Race thing is beyond dumb, but that’s the media and knee jerk social media these days. Race didn’t stop teams from handing out massive contracts or trade compensation for guys like Kyler, Watson or Wilson last year.
But news outlets have to get their clicks and Twitter hot takes need to get their likes!
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
I brought back up with the ESPN link, all I did was say i thought it was sad it might come down to race bait in the national press and you wanted to make a little side comment/insult which you frequently do. I simply am broadcasting what i hear and post as my basis for the opinion I put forth while you like to mock, it's not a big deal. I'm not offended, I'm playing your game a little better than you right now so back off Chief.I’m talking about in this thread.- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
Don't take MoP's word for it, let's hear what RC has to say
You like to jump in and make it personal with the insults, just stay on the script and what is being reported vs taking side swipes at the posters. It's your ammo of late, I'm asking politely for you to stop it.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Please link any insult I made towards you. I stated a fact. I said you brought race into this thread. That’s all I said. The beauty of this format is everything is a left there for everyone to see.I brought back up, all i did was say i thought it was sad it might come down to race bait in the national press and you wanted to make a little side comment/insult which you frequently do. I simply am broadcasting what i hear and post as my basis for the opinion I put forth while you like to mock, it's not a big deal. I'm not offended, I'm playing your game a little better than you right now so back off Chief.I’m talking about in this thread.- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
Don't take MoP's word for it, let's hear what RC has to say
You like to jump in and make it personal with the insults, just stay on the script and what is being reported vs taking side swipes at the posters. It's your ammo of late, I'm asking politely for you to stop it.
I’ll drop it as to not muck up the thread but not because of your “polite” request.
MTskibum
Footballguy
PFF passing grade Lamar Jackson:
2022: #19 in league between Kenny Picket and Teddy Bridgewater
2021: #31 between Jameis Winston and Kyle Allen
2020: #20
2019: #7!!
2018: #43
He has not had great outside weapons ever in his career, however the PFF grade is supposed to adjust for that. I am not sure what I would do if i was a GM of a one of the teams needing a QB. I do not think giving up 2 #1's and a giant contract is necessarily the right move.
2022: #19 in league between Kenny Picket and Teddy Bridgewater
2021: #31 between Jameis Winston and Kyle Allen
2020: #20
2019: #7!!
2018: #43
He has not had great outside weapons ever in his career, however the PFF grade is supposed to adjust for that. I am not sure what I would do if i was a GM of a one of the teams needing a QB. I do not think giving up 2 #1's and a giant contract is necessarily the right move.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Fair enough and I don't disagree but you have a 24 hour sports news network and many others with nothing but time on their hands for the next several months.
Free agency, the Draft, and a daily dose of "The State of Lamar Jackson"
It's going to make people nauseous after a while, especially the Ravens fan base.
massraider
Footballguy
How do Pickett and Teddy compare on rushing grades?
eighsse2
Footballguy
7!! has over 16,000 digits. There's just no way this is an accurate stat. Where did you get this data?
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
And it's gone down because he just had his second consecutive injury plagued mediocre season. I'm sure this is one of the arguments he and his mom are making, but I don't think most NFL teams would agree- I'd certainly pay Burrow and Herbert more guaranteed $ than him. If he wants to bet on himself again and comes back with a great, healthy season then that would change things, but I'm not sure any GM would take Lamar over those guys right now.
InDitkaWeTrust
Footballguy
Agreed. The Bears need help at LB, Edge, DT, RT, WR, C, RB, S and depth pretty much across the board. In a perfect world they get a solid LT, WR, C, and Edge in the draft and pull the rest and backups during FA. Poles continues to talk about building through the draft, so I suspect there won't be much in the way of earth shattering signings this season. Mostly backups and fill-ins for a few positions with the eye on getting the rookies as much experience as possible and working them into the rotation.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Lamar is the one costing himself money.
They say don't sell your own house? This is 10x worse than that, don't be your own agent in football.
They say don't sell your own house? This is 10x worse than that, don't be your own agent in football.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I heard some discussion that this really has nothing to do with Lamar, it's about teams not wanting to get pushed into guaranteeing contracts. All the other issues involving Jackson are mostly noise (his injury history, his passing numbers, not playing in the playoff game last year, his playoff record, not having an agent, etc.)
Thirty-one other owners are still incensed at Haslam for the fully guaranteed contract the Browns gave Watson (who was not a beloved player by fans). The rest of the league is pushing back and doesn't want to have to start doing that. So the perceived collusion is about contract structure and not the individual player. Almost 20% of the league has essentially said in a roundabout way that they aren't interested in guaranteeing a $250-300M deal. BAL has been reluctant and MIA, ATL, CAR, WAS, and LV yesterday all seemed to get the word out that they aren't interested either. That could be a diversion, but that's nearly 20% of the league. From the discussion I saw on TV, owners want the Watson deal to be an outlier, not the norm. It will be interesting to see if you really can get toothpaste back into the tube once it's already out. Certainly, the players want as much guaranteed money as possible, and the owners want to shell out as little as possible. Guaranteeing contracts will dramatically change teams being able to cut players, will require bigger chunks of cap allocation they can't get out of, will impact roster management discussions, etc.
Thirty-one other owners are still incensed at Haslam for the fully guaranteed contract the Browns gave Watson (who was not a beloved player by fans). The rest of the league is pushing back and doesn't want to have to start doing that. So the perceived collusion is about contract structure and not the individual player. Almost 20% of the league has essentially said in a roundabout way that they aren't interested in guaranteeing a $250-300M deal. BAL has been reluctant and MIA, ATL, CAR, WAS, and LV yesterday all seemed to get the word out that they aren't interested either. That could be a diversion, but that's nearly 20% of the league. From the discussion I saw on TV, owners want the Watson deal to be an outlier, not the norm. It will be interesting to see if you really can get toothpaste back into the tube once it's already out. Certainly, the players want as much guaranteed money as possible, and the owners want to shell out as little as possible. Guaranteeing contracts will dramatically change teams being able to cut players, will require bigger chunks of cap allocation they can't get out of, will impact roster management discussions, etc.
Tau837
Footballguy
The players will collectively make the same amount of money no matter how much is guaranteed and how much isn't. Teams must spend to a minimum average of 95% of the cap. Players are getting all of that money. If guaranteed contracts become the norm, and that precludes teams from moving on from players earlier in their contracts, that just means less opportunity and less money for other players. It's a zero sum game.
In addition to holding down the money they must put into escrow, owners presumably prefer the current system because it helps them recover from bad contract decisions and helps them to move on sooner from players whose performance has slipped. This should arguably result in better quality of play and should also result in more teams being able to field competitive teams, which is a positive for fans and thus for the NFL... and thus for the players as a whole.
I get that a given player, like Jackson, wants to maximize his guarantees. I don't really get why the NFLPA seems so invested in going down this path. I get that unions always want more concessions, etc. Is that all this is?
-OZ-
Footballguy
Fwiw, I agree. Just saying the possibility has been discussed for a while. Ultimately it’s unlikely but would just need the bears GM to think Lamar is better than fields by enough to make it worthwhile. Or they get enough in the deal to make up the difference in value. Seems super unlikely but most of us weren’t predicting Stafford, Wilson, tyreek, or AJ brown deals either.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Presumably you’ve never dealt with a union.
You’re asking why the players Union would be interested in their clients / players getting guaranteed money?
Tau837
Footballguy
I totally understand why more guaranteed money is good for Jackson or any individual player. But it's a zero sum game for the players collectively. Any time one player makes more, one or more other players make less.
-OZ-
Footballguy
I assume it’s the guarantee they’re really interested in.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Why are they so interested in the top dozen guys getting nutty deals but the lesser guys continuing to get peanuts
facook
Footballguy
Ultimately they want NFL contracts fully guaranteed like NBA or MLB. Lamar is a pawn in their game to get to that end.
Tau837
Footballguy
I would observe that the NFL has a hard cap, which the NBA and MLB do not. That matters. NBA and MLB teams can overcome mistake contracts if they are simply willing to spend more.
I also think having much larger rosters playing a game that is much more violent with more injuries makes guaranteeing all contracts a bad thing for the quality of the NFL game. I expect NFL leadership and owners get that.
I don't see the NFL ever getting to all contracts being fully guaranteed. Heck, I think we are a long way from another QB besides Watson getting a fully guaranteed contract, much less any player at any other position getting one.
facook
Footballguy
I don't necessarily disagree with anything you stated here. But NLFPA Pres De Smith has made it clear publicly he wants fully guaranteed contracts for his union members. And that they were hoping Kirk Cousins' deal would be a game changer. NFLPA was upset/irritated when other quarterbacks did not follow suit, and now see Watson's deal as the next opportunity to work toward their goal. I think Smith is a clown and bad at his job (and he was BARELY reelected last go round), but he's been honest about this goal.
massraider
Footballguy
Or maybe they are, but they just are shorter.
No more fake contract dollars, and no more long term control. Contracts all already fully guaranteed for two years, so what's wrong with just having short deals?
-OZ-
Footballguy
Sure. And this is where the interests of individual players and the union are at odds with the owners. You can certainly argue the big picture and side with the owners. Or there can be compromises eventually. I think the CBA runs for 7 more years so any changes probably won’t be quick.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Renegotiating with half your team every year can be a pain.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Apologies if its been discussed - when was the last time a team signed a non-exclusive franchise tag player to an offer sheet?
edit - according to this guy on Twitter:
But not really my question. I'm wondering when was the last time a player even signed an offer sheet from another team, even if he ended up coming back.
edit - according to this guy on Twitter:
But not really my question. I'm wondering when was the last time a player even signed an offer sheet from another team, even if he ended up coming back.
Last edited:
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
According to the internet, only 5 QB's have been (non-exclusive) tagged and none of them signed an offer sheet with another team. All returned.
Steve Young
Jim Harbaugh
Drew Brees
Matt Cassel
Kirk Cousins (Washington)
Steve Young
Jim Harbaugh
Drew Brees
Matt Cassel
Kirk Cousins (Washington)
In retrospect, its really crazy that nobody was willing to give up 2 1sts and a monster deal to Steve Young in 1993. Dude was 31 and coming off winning the NFL MVP. There should have been 20+ teams trying to get him.
ETA: History would have been really interesting if SF had gotten 2 1sts for Young, and then just kept Montana.
Last edited:
-OZ-
Footballguy
Almost gives credence to the idea that teams just don’t sign other teams’ QBs who were tagged.
afaik only a couple players have ever changed teams on the non-exclusive tag last being Joey Galloway in 2000Almost gives credence to the idea that teams just don’t sign other teams’ QBs who were tagged.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
afaik only a couple players have ever changed teams on the non-exclusive tag last being Joey Galloway in 2000Almost gives credence to the idea that teams just don’t sign other teams’ QBs who were tagged.
I think Galloway was a straight trade for 2 firsts. The Seahawks' tag rights may have played into the compensation they got, but I don't he signed an offer sheet with the Cowboys to force a move under the non-exclusive franchise tag rules.
Similar threads
