QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (6 Viewers)

[Tau837]

Rumors starting of a very rich contract from the NY Jets.
$200M/4yrs mostly guaranteed, seems like an easy contract to hammer out.

Rumors from where? That’s a sincere question.
It doesn’t make sense though. Why would contract numbers be discussed since Jackson isn’t even a free agent yet.

Well, it would presumaby be via a tag and trade. I assume it is fair game for teams to be discussing possible trades of veteran players right now... and, as you point out, Jackson is technically still under contract at the moment.

I think any team would be foolish to give him a guaranteed $200M contract over 4 years, so $50M per year guaranteed, while also trading away significant draft capital, like 2+ first round picks and more. If he returns to MVP form, stays mostly healthy, and the Jets make multiple deep playoff runs, maybe that trade works out... but that's what it would take, and it's a big gamble IMO.

Seems like a better gamble than Watson.
that’s a low bar. But also what he seems to be using as a comp.

Sure, I agree he is a better gamble than Watson at a similar total price (contract, trade compensation). But I also think Cleveland made a huge mistake, so I don't view that as good reason for another team to do something that is more likely than not to be another mistake.

I realize, like Cleveland, it only takes one team that is willing to do it, so it very well may happen.

 

[-OZ-]

Rumors starting of a very rich contract from the NY Jets.
$200M/4yrs mostly guaranteed, seems like an easy contract to hammer out.

Rumors from where? That’s a sincere question.
It doesn’t make sense though. Why would contract numbers be discussed since Jackson isn’t even a free agent yet.

Well, it would presumaby be via a tag and trade. I assume it is fair game for teams to be discussing possible trades of veteran players right now... and, as you point out, Jackson is technically still under contract at the moment.

I think any team would be foolish to give him a guaranteed $200M contract over 4 years, so $50M per year guaranteed, while also trading away significant draft capital, like 2+ first round picks and more. If he returns to MVP form, stays mostly healthy, and the Jets make multiple deep playoff runs, maybe that trade works out... but that's what it would take, and it's a big gamble IMO.

Seems like a better gamble than Watson.
that’s a low bar. But also what he seems to be using as a comp.

Sure, I agree he is a better gamble than Watson at a similar total price (contract, trade compensation). But I also think Cleveland made a huge mistake, so I don't view that as good reason for another team to do something that is more likely than not to be another mistake.

I realize, like Cleveland, it only takes one team that is willing to do it, so it very well may happen.

A radio show talked yesterday about how the and ravens should just swap QBs. have the money.
Gotta admit, I like it. But it won’t happen.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Reported on Nick Wright's show on FS1

-$250M with $133M guaranteed was rebuffed by Jackson in Aug/Sept right before the start of the season.

FIRST THINGS FIRST | "Ravens and QB Lamar Jackson could be parting ways" - Nick Wright

#Undisputed #SkipBayless #shannonsharpe FIRST THINGS FIRST | "Ravens and QB Lamar Jackson could be parting ways" - Nick Wright

www.youtube.com

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers sold for $192M in 1995
Yes I think about these things

They say there is close to $100M gap in guaranteed money.

 

[menobrown]

ESPN's Dianna Russini reports Lamar Jackson is receiving "guidance" from the NFLPA in his ongoing contract negotiations with the Ravens.​

Through his first five years in the league, Jackson has famously operated without an agent. While he continues to work out a contract negotiation without an agent, Russini says Jackson "is not negotiating alone" as the NFLPA has been assisting him in his efforts to work out a deal with the Ravens this offseason. Arguably the most interesting contract negotiation of any that will take place this offseason, Jackson and the Ravens are reportedly $100 million apart at this time, which could ultimately lead to the team franchise tagging him before the start of the season. Whether or not Jackson would play on the tag is another question that's yet to be answered, as the Ravens could look to trade him for a substantial haul if he threatens to hold out.
SOURCE: Dianna Russini on Twitter
Feb 23, 2023, 11:03 AM ET

If he's receiving guidance from the NFLPA I'm sure they are highly encouraging him to not bend on his guarantee demands.

He may play for the Ravens next year on the tag but put me down as saying he's never going to agree to an extension with the Ravens. If he's not played his last game with them already, he's about to play his last season with them.

 

[fatness]

Reported on Nick Wright's show on FS1

-$250M with $133M guaranteed was rebuffed by Jackson in Aug/Sept right before the start of the season.

They say there is close to $100M gap in guaranteed money.

That doesn't say there was a $300m offer.
$255m with $233 guaranteed would fit with what you described.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Reported on Nick Wright's show on FS1

-$250M with $133M guaranteed was rebuffed by Jackson in Aug/Sept right before the start of the season.

They say there is close to $100M gap in guaranteed money.

That doesn't say there was a $300m offer.
$255m with $233 guaranteed would fit with what you described.

I agree with you, let me clarify a couple things.

-I think that ship sailed in September, I would bet Jackson is asking for even more now.
-I personally do not think he can stay in Baltimore any longer.
-He can hold out until 3 days before the season starts if they franchise tag him. That would kill the '23 season with a new OC coming in and no time to learn.

As this unfolds, I'm going to be interested in how some of my posts hold up because I am taking a large position that Baltimore cannot reach a deal at this point with Jackson and the franchise tag is going to blow up in their face.
And the Ravens were "flummoxed" that he didn't start at the end of the year? And he was suddenly difficult to work with? Line the NFL teams up that will take Jackson off their shoulders. The list is long and quite distinguished.

Where I would like some help from folks like you and the Shark Pool is I don't quite understand the franchise tag and I'll be very specific. If they do that to Jackson, teams can still try and trade for him or agree to 3 first round picks? Or can a team offer Jackson $300M guaranteed and Baltimore would have to match which could scare the **** out of the Ravens. There has to be a number they won't be willing to match, almost becomes a game of chicken at that point.

And people can point to Watson and Murray and act like those are not true market value or way overshot and yes those things might be true but you cannot ignore them. And those 2 QBs haven't had the same success as the guys getting ready to cash in their $250M+ lottery ticket like Burrow, Hurts, Herbert close to that figure as well. And who knows what Miami will do with Tua, that's an owner you cannot put anything past at this point. He's 82 and cheats.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Ryan Burns
@FtblSickness
Bingo. This is the thing.
------------------------
Gregg Rosenthal
@greggrosenthal
If the Ravens don't want to fully guarantee Lamar's contract, another team will
-----------------------
Patrick Grannan@magrampip
Except they won't get the chance until the multi-year franchise tag dance plays out
Ryan Burns@FtblSickness
I don't think that dance is going to play all the way out.
-----------------------
ESPN@espn
Lamar Jackson has sent counteroffers to the Ravens that "all exceeded the full guarantees" given to Deshaun Watson.
Jeff-LJ-Lloyd
@Jeff_LJ_Lloyd
I’d love to know what Baltimore is doing here, this deal needed to be done 18 months ago

 

[humpback]

LOL at the Browns podcast guy tweeting "I'd love to know what Baltimore is doing here". I bet you do, your abysmal organization might actually learn a thing or two.

And yes, you can "ignore", or at least justify not repeating the mistakes of, the Watson and Murray contracts. No one wants to be like Cleveland or Arizona. If he sticks to his guns, deal him away to one of the remaining terrible organizations and move on.

 

[-OZ-]

Reported on Nick Wright's show on FS1

-$250M with $133M guaranteed was rebuffed by Jackson in Aug/Sept right before the start of the season.

They say there is close to $100M gap in guaranteed money.

That doesn't say there was a $300m offer.
$255m with $233 guaranteed would fit with what you described.

I agree with you, let me clarify a couple things.

-I think that ship sailed in September, I would bet Jackson is asking for even more now.
-I personally do not think he can stay in Baltimore any longer.
-He can hold out until 3 days before the season starts if they franchise tag him. That would kill the '23 season with a new OC coming in and no time to learn.

As this unfolds, I'm going to be interested in how some of my posts hold up because I am taking a large position that Baltimore cannot reach a deal at this point with Jackson and the franchise tag is going to blow up in their face.
And the Ravens were "flummoxed" that he didn't start at the end of the year? And he was suddenly difficult to work with? Line the NFL teams up that will take Jackson off their shoulders. The list is long and quite distinguished.

Where I would like some help from folks like you and the Shark Pool is I don't quite understand the franchise tag and I'll be very specific. If they do that to Jackson, teams can still try and trade for him or agree to 3 first round picks? Or can a team offer Jackson $300M guaranteed and Baltimore would have to match which could scare the **** out of the Ravens. There has to be a number they won't be willing to match, almost becomes a game of chicken at that point.

And people can point to Watson and Murray and act like those are not true market value or way overshot and yes those things might be true but you cannot ignore them. And those 2 QBs haven't had the same success as the guys getting ready to cash in their $250M+ lottery ticket like Burrow, Hurts, Herbert close to that figure as well. And who knows what Miami will do with Tua, that's an owner you cannot put anything past at this point. He's 82 and cheats.

I believe, with the exclusive tag, they can match or get two 1sts. Which might be a good deal. There’s probably a few teams willing to give a couple firsts and the money.
I still like the thought that Chicago would then deal fields to Baltimore and draft BY. (Partly because I don’t want BY in the Texans or colts)

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Ryan Burns
@FtblSickness
Bingo. This is the thing.
------------------------
Gregg Rosenthal
@greggrosenthal
If the Ravens don't want to fully guarantee Lamar's contract, another team will
-----------------------
Patrick Grannan@magrampip
Except they won't get the chance until the multi-year franchise tag dance plays out
Ryan Burns@FtblSickness
I don't think that dance is going to play all the way out.
-----------------------
ESPN@espn
Lamar Jackson has sent counteroffers to the Ravens that "all exceeded the full guarantees" given to Deshaun Watson.
Jeff-LJ-Lloyd
@Jeff_LJ_Lloyd
I’d love to know what Baltimore is doing here, this deal needed to be done 18 months ago

Exactly!

-Another Team will pay him happily and trade for him, there's no reason to try and dig into the Ravens FO which has been good over the years.
-No teams are going to buy into Jackson not taking the field on purpose at the end of last year but even if that's true, teams don't give a damn right now.
-All his counteroffers are North of Watson, this should end well

 

[Bracie Smathers]

6:30 = Lamar Jackson contract with the Raven's being so far apart in guaranteed aspect of his contract boils down to the Ravens owner not having enough money sitting around in escrow. How many owners have $200 million sitting around?

9:20 = Joe Burrow will sign a contract for MORE MONEY than Watson with 'rolling guarantees'
------------------
Justin Kinner
@1410Kinner
We're joined LIVE by @JackDuffin with the @TheOBR as we break down the salary cap hurdles for the #Browns #Bengals #Ravens & #Steelers! @ESPNDayton
============
>>> LINK

 

[-OZ-]

.
-All his counteroffers are North of Watson, this should end well

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

GET UP | Baltimore Ravens and QB Lamar Jackson could be parting ways - Ryan Clark

GET UP | Baltimore Ravens and QB Lamar Jackson could be parting ways - Ryan Clark

www.youtube.com

Get Up!

 

[massraider]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

 

[Tau837]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Not necessarily. Burrow could get a 10 year contract like Mahomes. Suppose he got a 10 year, $500M contract. IMO there is no way it is all guaranteed.

As a Chargers fan, I'd be happy with the Chargers signing Herbert to a 10 year, $500M contract with $175M-$200M guaranteed. Heck, I'd be fine with $250M or more guaranteed.

However, a problem for the Chargers could be what was alluded to above for the Ravens - all guaranteed money has to be placed into escrow, if I understand correctly. The Chargers cash flow is presumably among the lowest in the league, which makes that issue a real challenge. Not sure where the Bengals stand on that. Or the Ravens for that matter, but it was mentioned in a previous post.

If I'm misunderstanding that issue, I would appreciate someone correcting me. That previous post also mentioned "rolling guarantees." I'd be interested in understanding that better, if it gets around the escrow issue. It reminds me of the Gurley contract, where each year at the start of the league year, his salary for the following season became guaranteed, which kept steadily increasing the cap hit associated with releasing him.

 

[massraider]

However, a problem for the Chargers could be what was alluded to above for the Ravens - all guaranteed money has to be placed into escrow, if I understand correctly. The Chargers cash flow is presumably among the lowest in the league, which makes that issue a real challenge.

I am unsure if this is a real issue. If an NFL owner has to borrow 200 mill to stick in escrow for 5 years, I am sure he can get a lovely rate.

 

[Tau837]

However, a problem for the Chargers could be what was alluded to above for the Ravens - all guaranteed money has to be placed into escrow, if I understand correctly. The Chargers cash flow is presumably among the lowest in the league, which makes that issue a real challenge.

I am unsure if this is a real issue. If an NFL owner has to borrow 200 mill to stick in escrow for 5 years, I am sure he can get a lovely rate.

Agree, that's why I said I wasn't sure. I'm not sure it has ever been an issue in the past, since guarantees have skyrocketed in the past couple offseasons, so this seems like potentially uncharted territory.

A team like the Chargers already has significant loans to pay off the fees to relocate, and maybe for other business reasons. I have no idea if it is a trivial thing for them to get more loans for $200M+ if they needed that.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

ESPN LEAK? Lamar Jackson's 'Camp' Apparently Spoke to Stephen A. Smith Regarding Ravens 'Lowball' Offer
On Friday, ESPN host Stephen A. Smith spoke on First Take regarding Jackson and the Ravens' negotiations. Smith claims that Jackson's people reached out to him with some specific information.
...Smith said on the air, that Jackson's camp claims that Lamar never demanded a fully-guaranteed contract.
...Smith also said Jackson's camp told him the Ravens' best offer before the 2022 season was $133 million fully guaranteed. If that's the case, it seems like a lowball offer considering other recent quarterback contracts.

Watson's contract with Cleveland includes $230 million fully guaranteed, Kyler Murray's deal with Arizona includes $189 million fully guaranteed, and Russell Wilson's most recent contract with Denver includes $165 million fully guaranteed.
...If that $133 million number is accurate, there's no wonder the sides are so far apart in negotiations.

Smith concluded by addressing the Baltimore Ravens organization directly: “Did you or did you not lowball this man with an offer of 133 million guaranteed? Because that is a lowball offer. If that answer is ‘yes,’ you are trying to screw him over.”
...This is quickly becoming a public relations nightmare for the organization, and if things don't settle down soon, it could be a situation that's irreparable between the two sides.
...It's quickly becoming less and less likely that Jackson will play another down for Baltimore,

 

[Ghost Rider]

Jackson not having an agent likely isn't helping things here. If he is dug in to getting more than Murray and Watson got, the Ravens would be smart to say, "see ya," and move on. Yeah, they will take a hit in the short term, but it's not like Lamar playing on a rookie contract got them anywhere in the playoffs (one playoff win with Lamar...woah, stand back!!), and if you give him big guaranteed money, your chances of surrounding him with a great team diminish greatly, and Lamar has not shown that he can put a team on his back in the playoffs and carry them to a deep playoff run. Just because the Browns and Cards were stupid and gave ridiculous money to their QBs doesn't mean the Ravens have to as well.

 

[Grahamburn]

The Mouth, The Mad Dog and The Key discuss things

Trying to think of what it would take for me to click that link.

I will give you the key* to the mouth of the mad dog. You can put whatever you like in there.












*the key is bacon

 

[Bracie Smathers]

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

No, no, and possibly.

The Browns have not had a QB of Watson's caliber in modern times including Brian Sipe's 1980 MVP year. Bernie Kosar was uber intelligent but may have been the most UN-athletic QB in NFL history. They had to make him line up with one foot pulling back from center because his feet were so slow he'd constantly trip over his offensive linemen. I digress.
Everyone knows of the Browns inability to draft and acquire quarterbacks and the issues of not having a good QB creates. They got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime. Not a debate, they got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime.

The Browns did NOT give an enormous guarantee thinking it would create problems for other teams within the division with talented young QBs coming off rookie salaries who would also want enormous guarantees. If Burrow gets paid as we all assume it is because he earned it, same with Lamar Jackson.

Per thinking it is make believe and that money doesn't matter anyway. Its real and eventually matters but the cap can and is always manipulated. SB winning teams typically have a top QB and make a push by leveraging their cap.
I posted previously in this thread about the wiiiiiiiiiiiiide disparity in the contracts of a handful of top QBs and the rest. The huge gap creates a big problem for teams getting caught in a bind if their QB is 'good' but not one of the top QBs because if they let him walk they are screwed. Jackson's situation is one of most intriguing because he's had incredible numbers and success, he's young and in his prime. Baltimore 'should' have extended him long ago. They simply should have so no one should be spilling tears for Baltimore.
This entire SB/QB/cap quandary is a big issue to the point that someone recently tweeted about a solution.
-----------------------
Sigmund Bloom
@SigmundBloom
I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot.

 

[-OZ-]

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

No, no, and possibly.

The Browns have not had a QB of Watson's caliber in modern times including Brian Sipe's 1980 MVP year. Bernie Kosar was uber intelligent but may have been the most UN-athletic QB in NFL history. They had to make him line up with one foot pulling back from center because his feet were so slow he'd constantly trip over his offensive linemen. I digress.
Everyone knows of the Browns inability to draft and acquire quarterbacks and the issues of not having a good QB creates. They got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime. Not a debate, they got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime.

The Browns did NOT give an enormous guarantee thinking it would create problems for other teams within the division with talented young QBs coming off rookie salaries who would also want enormous guarantees. If Burrow gets paid as we all assume it is because he earned it, same with Lamar Jackson.

Per thinking it is make believe and that money doesn't matter anyway. Its real and eventually matters but the cap can and is always manipulated. SB winning teams typically have a top QB and make a push by leveraging their cap.
I posted previously in this thread about the wiiiiiiiiiiiiide disparity in the contracts of a handful of top QBs and the rest. The huge gap creates a big problem for teams getting caught in a bind if their QB is 'good' but not one of the top QBs because if they let him walk they are screwed. Jackson's situation is one of most intriguing because he's had incredible numbers and success, he's young and in his prime. Baltimore 'should' have extended him long ago. They simply should have so no one should be spilling tears for Baltimore.
This entire SB/QB/cap quandary is a big issue to the point that someone recently tweeted about a solution.
-----------------------
Sigmund Bloom
@SigmundBloom
I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot.

I definitely respect your opinion, and much of what you write. But you’ll never convince me that the browns franchise isn’t run horribly. Including this transaction and contract. Watson, if he returns to his form, will be the best they’ve had, on the field anyway. But that’s not a particularly glowing review of the franchise.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

you’ll never convince me that the browns franchise isn’t run horribly. Including this transaction and contract. Watson, if he returns to his form, will be the best they’ve had, on the field anyway. But that’s not a particularly glowing review of the franchise.

Teams change over front office people till they find success. Before the new GM I'd agree but this isn't the same FO.
Consider one year ago when Baker Mayfield was demanding the Browns pay him $40 million per year and the Browns declined and Baker publicly balked forcing the team to trade him, but no one wanted to take on his salary so he ate over $3 million to get the deal done because he was certain he was right, and the Browns were wrong.
------------------------
Wendell Ferreira
@wendellfp

Free agent QBs market value (APY) according to
@Spotrac
: Lamar Jackson 40.7M
Geno Smith 39.3M
Derek Carr 37.7M
Jimmy Garoppolo 34.9M
Daniel Jones 26.2M
Taylor Heinicke 19.8M
Andy Dalton 6.8M
Baker Mayfield 6.5M
Jacoby Brissett 5.4M
Sam Darnold 5.1M
------------------------------
He'll never recover the $3 million he ate but the Browns FO saved $40 million.

The current Browns FO has locked up key players to long-term deals early before other teams who paid more for similar talent. They did not push in all the chips last year because the knew Watson would be suspended which allowed them to carry over the most salary cap of any team to this year $32 million. Add in $40 million not wasted on extending Baker Mayfield. I'd also add the cap savings of locking up core players to long-term deals early but don't have those numbers and subtract the entire last guaranteed year of Watson's contract and a chuck of his fourth year. The past year was the $1 million dollar year so basically that leaves two years of huge cap hits that can and will be restructured. They've already paid out a mid/late 1st round pick and an early/mid 1st round pick leaving only one left to pay out before reaping any benefits of building a team and scheme tailored to Watson.
There are many more examples, but you said you cannot be convinced and that is fine.
It isn't a debate, the Browns FO got the best QB in modern team history after decades of struggles to find THAT GUY and in spite of the constant drone of ESPN propaganda who never acknowledge how much was saved by not extending Mayfield or other FO office moves by this CURRENT team which has completely turned over from a few years ago, the price in terms of draft capital is nearly complete so we'll see in three years how it turns out in how the FO manages building the team with cap constraints. So far, they've done excellent.

 

[Chaka]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

The Bengals need to back the Brinks truck up to Burrow's door immediately. It's not like he's going to get any less expensive.

 

[Chaka]

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

I would like to see a team peg QB compensation to the cap.

 

[-OZ-]

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

No, no, and possibly.

The Browns have not had a QB of Watson's caliber in modern times including Brian Sipe's 1980 MVP year. Bernie Kosar was uber intelligent but may have been the most UN-athletic QB in NFL history. They had to make him line up with one foot pulling back from center because his feet were so slow he'd constantly trip over his offensive linemen. I digress.
Everyone knows of the Browns inability to draft and acquire quarterbacks and the issues of not having a good QB creates. They got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime. Not a debate, they got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime.

The Browns did NOT give an enormous guarantee thinking it would create problems for other teams within the division with talented young QBs coming off rookie salaries who would also want enormous guarantees. If Burrow gets paid as we all assume it is because he earned it, same with Lamar Jackson.

Per thinking it is make believe and that money doesn't matter anyway. Its real and eventually matters but the cap can and is always manipulated. SB winning teams typically have a top QB and make a push by leveraging their cap.
I posted previously in this thread about the wiiiiiiiiiiiiide disparity in the contracts of a handful of top QBs and the rest. The huge gap creates a big problem for teams getting caught in a bind if their QB is 'good' but not one of the top QBs because if they let him walk they are screwed. Jackson's situation is one of most intriguing because he's had incredible numbers and success, he's young and in his prime. Baltimore 'should' have extended him long ago. They simply should have so no one should be spilling tears for Baltimore.
This entire SB/QB/cap quandary is a big issue to the point that someone recently tweeted about a solution.
-----------------------
Sigmund Bloom
@SigmundBloom
I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot.

Totally disagree with the notion of separating QBs from other players unless they went to a cap by each position. Separating doesn’t fix the issue presented.

 

[Chaka]

I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot

That's genius.

However wouldn't it create a situation where teams with "poor" owners couldn't find a way to sign and retain the top QBs? It would be impossible for the Bengals or Chargers to compete with teams with unlimited resources like the Broncos and Cowboys for guys like Burrow & Herbert.

 

[Birdie048]

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

No, no, and possibly.

The Browns have not had a QB of Watson's caliber in modern times including Brian Sipe's 1980 MVP year. Bernie Kosar was uber intelligent but may have been the most UN-athletic QB in NFL history. They had to make him line up with one foot pulling back from center because his feet were so slow he'd constantly trip over his offensive linemen. I digress.
Everyone knows of the Browns inability to draft and acquire quarterbacks and the issues of not having a good QB creates. They got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime. Not a debate, they got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime.

The Browns did NOT give an enormous guarantee thinking it would create problems for other teams within the division with talented young QBs coming off rookie salaries who would also want enormous guarantees. If Burrow gets paid as we all assume it is because he earned it, same with Lamar Jackson.

Per thinking it is make believe and that money doesn't matter anyway. Its real and eventually matters but the cap can and is always manipulated. SB winning teams typically have a top QB and make a push by leveraging their cap.
I posted previously in this thread about the wiiiiiiiiiiiiide disparity in the contracts of a handful of top QBs and the rest. The huge gap creates a big problem for teams getting caught in a bind if their QB is 'good' but not one of the top QBs because if they let him walk they are screwed. Jackson's situation is one of most intriguing because he's had incredible numbers and success, he's young and in his prime. Baltimore 'should' have extended him long ago. They simply should have so no one should be spilling tears for Baltimore.
This entire SB/QB/cap quandary is a big issue to the point that someone recently tweeted about a solution.
-----------------------
Sigmund Bloom
@SigmundBloom
I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot.

Totally disagree with the notion of separating QBs from other players unless they went to a cap by each position. Separating doesn’t fix the issue presented.

Does that evolve from the NFL Draft pay scale tied to draft position except for playing position?
Having a salary cap for each position? Is that what you are suggesting?
I see merit but also limitation for some Owners & FO not wanting to be restricted on how they manage their money or roster

 

[Bri]

I saw a graphic of the average length of mobile/athletic QB careers and....I gotta say it changes me from "pay the man" to "franchise that guy."
If you look and think on the list, so many absolutely plummeted shockingly fast from a star/up n comer to pfffft.

I'd love to see this graphic, as well as a graphic of non-mobile/non-athletic QB careers.

I started to dig some and quit, had life n family stuff to do.
One thing I struggled with-
QBs drafted late often don't play.
Is it four years experience if a guy took a handful of snaps in that time? Or do it like an accrued season?
I mean four years of holding kicks or end of game snaps with like ten passes feels very much like pffft.
Anyway, I was gonna work something up sorry didn't have time

 

[Bri]

I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot

That's genius.

However wouldn't it create a situation where teams with "poor" owners couldn't find a way to sign and retain the top QBs. It would be impossible for the Bengals or Chargers to compete with teams with unlimited resources like the Broncos and Cowboys for guys like Burrow & Herbert?

There's some that believe Bobby Bonilla's contract wasn't rare. For example, suppose Brady redoing his contract to play for less was Kraft agreeing to pay him ten mil for ten years when he retires. It's not against the cap, we don't track retired players salaries, and there's nothing illegal about gifts etc.
Anyway, these people think it already happens. It's a decent conspiracy theory that could have some legs

 

[humpback]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

 

[-OZ-]

It’s almost like (A) the browns are mismanaged (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations (C) all this is make believe and the money doesn’t really matter anyway.

No, no, and possibly.

The Browns have not had a QB of Watson's caliber in modern times including Brian Sipe's 1980 MVP year. Bernie Kosar was uber intelligent but may have been the most UN-athletic QB in NFL history. They had to make him line up with one foot pulling back from center because his feet were so slow he'd constantly trip over his offensive linemen. I digress.
Everyone knows of the Browns inability to draft and acquire quarterbacks and the issues of not having a good QB creates. They got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime. Not a debate, they got the best QB in the history of the franchise in his prime.

The Browns did NOT give an enormous guarantee thinking it would create problems for other teams within the division with talented young QBs coming off rookie salaries who would also want enormous guarantees. If Burrow gets paid as we all assume it is because he earned it, same with Lamar Jackson.

Per thinking it is make believe and that money doesn't matter anyway. Its real and eventually matters but the cap can and is always manipulated. SB winning teams typically have a top QB and make a push by leveraging their cap.
I posted previously in this thread about the wiiiiiiiiiiiiide disparity in the contracts of a handful of top QBs and the rest. The huge gap creates a big problem for teams getting caught in a bind if their QB is 'good' but not one of the top QBs because if they let him walk they are screwed. Jackson's situation is one of most intriguing because he's had incredible numbers and success, he's young and in his prime. Baltimore 'should' have extended him long ago. They simply should have so no one should be spilling tears for Baltimore.
This entire SB/QB/cap quandary is a big issue to the point that someone recently tweeted about a solution.
-----------------------
Sigmund Bloom
@SigmundBloom
I forget who floated the idea of the QB position not counting against the cap, but it's brilliant and end the practices of skewing QB draft value and mediocre starter value through the roof
Anand Nanduri@NanduriNFL
I am of the mindset that swinging and missing on a first round QB is infinitely better than paying an average QB starter money in today’s NFL. If you don’t have a value contract at the position or an absolute DUDE you’re in a really tough spot.

Totally disagree with the notion of separating QBs from other players unless they went to a cap by each position. Separating doesn’t fix the issue presented.

Does that evolve from the NFL Draft pay scale tied to draft position except for playing position?
Having a salary cap for each position? Is that what you are suggesting?
I see merit but also limitation for some Owners & FO not wanting to be restricted on how they manage their money or roster

I don’t like separating the positions.
Frankly I think there should be a cap for coaches too.

 

[Ghost Rider]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

 

[Mitchie]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

 

[IHEARTFF]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

 

[Mitchie]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

perhaps, but better not to overpay in either case

 

[-OZ-]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

perhaps, but better not to overpay in either case

We can always say it’s better off to not overpay. But isn’t that the whole point? What is Lamar worth to a franchise?

Off hand, an easy argument can be made that of the top 5 paid QBs:

TOTAL CASH​

1. Aaron Rodgers
   GB, QB
   $59,515,000
2. Deshaun Watson
   CLE, QB
   $46,000,000
3. Patrick Mahomes
   KC, QB
   $40,450,000
4. Kyler Murray
   ARI, QB
   $39,000,000
5. Dak Prescott
   DAL, QB
   $31,000,000

He’s worth more than 3 of them.

 

[Mitchie]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

perhaps, but better not to overpay in either case

We can always say it’s better off to not overpay. But isn’t that the whole point? What is Lamar worth to a franchise?

Off hand, an easy argument can be made that of the top 5 paid QBs:

TOTAL CASH​

1. Aaron Rodgers
   GB, QB
   $59,515,000
2. Deshaun Watson
   CLE, QB
   $46,000,000
3. Patrick Mahomes
   KC, QB
   $40,450,000
4. Kyler Murray
   ARI, QB
   $39,000,000
5. Dak Prescott
   DAL, QB
   $31,000,000

He’s worth more than 3 of them.

i don't think there's any question he's going to get a ton of money, the sticking point sounds like it's around the guaranteed money. As a franchise i don't think you just write a check and let the player fill in the amount. Have to draw the line somewhere.

 

[Chaka]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

 

[-OZ-]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

perhaps, but better not to overpay in either case

We can always say it’s better off to not overpay. But isn’t that the whole point? What is Lamar worth to a franchise?

Off hand, an easy argument can be made that of the top 5 paid QBs:

TOTAL CASH​

1. Aaron Rodgers
   GB, QB
   $59,515,000
2. Deshaun Watson
   CLE, QB
   $46,000,000
3. Patrick Mahomes
   KC, QB
   $40,450,000
4. Kyler Murray
   ARI, QB
   $39,000,000
5. Dak Prescott
   DAL, QB
   $31,000,000

He’s worth more than 3 of them.

i don't think there's any question he's going to get a ton of money, the sticking point sounds like it's around the guaranteed money. As a franchise i don't think you just write a check and let the player fill in the amount. Have to draw the line somewhere.

There’s a middle ground for sure.
I’m just saying I don’t fault the guy for wanting to maximize that, especially when other teams would (probably, and he thinks) give him more than the ravens are offering.

 

[-OZ-]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

 

[humpback]

We can always say it’s better off to not overpay. But isn’t that the whole point? What is Lamar worth to a franchise?

Off hand, an easy argument can be made that of the top 5 paid QBs:

TOTAL CASH​

1. Aaron Rodgers
   GB, QB
   $59,515,000
2. Deshaun Watson
   CLE, QB
   $46,000,000
3. Patrick Mahomes
   KC, QB
   $40,450,000
4. Kyler Murray
   ARI, QB
   $39,000,000
5. Dak Prescott
   DAL, QB
   $31,000,000

He’s worth more than 3 of them.

Total cash isn't really the best metric but those 3 guys (4 outside of Mahomes) won a total of 1 playoff game, so you could make a strong argument that none of them were "worth it".

On the flip side, there are several guys who make far less who are better than Lamar as well.

 

[Chaka]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

You know I'm right.

 

[-OZ-]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

You know I'm right.

If you honestly think the NFL decided who wins, why are you even here?

 

[Ghost Rider]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

LOL, considering the 49ers/Ravens Super Bowl happened years before the Kaepernick kneeling thing, this is a (bad) joke, right?

 

[Chaka]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

You know I'm right.

If you honestly think the NFL decided who wins, why are you even here?

For the dazzling conversation.

 

[Chaka]

If another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, then that is true for Burrow and Hurts, yes?

Sooo, what happens when BAL gets another good QB?

Tons of speculation here- we don't know if another team is going to fully guarantee Lamar, and that doesn't necessarily mean that would then be true for Burrow and Hurts. They are different players with different organizations, and Watson's deal didn't lead to others signing fully guaranteed deals. That said, I think the case to fully/mostly guarantee Burrow especially is much stronger than Lamar.

This narrative that Baltimore is "cheap" is absurd. They gave Joe Flacco the largest contract in NFL history remember. The difference is that he was coming off a Super Bowl winning epic post season performance, while Lamar just finished his second consecutive disappointing, injury riddled season.

When the Ravens get another good QB, they will very likely give him what he's worth if not more. Lamar isn't worth what he thinks he is, at least not to a good organization.

Agreed.

As usual, the sports media is totally in the tank for Jackson, and love to spin dishonest spins and narratives. I heard that Stephen A. Smith actually said on live TV this week that Jackson doesn't have a number 1 WR or a number 1 TE. What in the hell is Mark Andrews? And more than a few have trashed the Ravens for being willing to give Flacco a big contract and not Jackson, using the "Flacco got carried to a Super Bowl win by the defense" narrative, which is so dishonest as that Ravens defense was not the 2000 Ravens (and allowed over 30 points in two of the four playoff games) AND Flacco was lights out that entire postseason (11 TD and 0 INTs in four games). The next really good playoff game Jackson plays might be as good as the worst game Flacco played in that playoff run.

well the Flacco deal was kinda a disaster so maybe the Ravens learned their lesson?

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

It's very difficult to tell the difference without hindsight. Flacco did win a Superbowl... because the NFL decided, and ensured they should win because they prefer to promote a murderer rather than a guy who dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed rights.


Just saying.

LOL, considering the 49ers/Ravens Super Bowl happened years before the Kaepernick kneeling thing, this is a (bad) joke, right?

Of course it's a joke. And it's hilarious.

My goodness people.

 

[travdogg]

Or Flacco was a middling qb who ran hot that playoffs and Lamar is a franchise qb that should be paid according

I'm not sure I 100% agree with the Lamar part, but the Flacco part is dead on. Flacco was a C- QB in his prime. Lamar is slightly overrated in my opinion, but he's a quality starter.

We can always say it’s better off to not overpay. But isn’t that the whole point? What is Lamar worth to a franchise?

Off hand, an easy argument can be made that of the top 5 paid QBs:

TOTAL CASH​

1. Aaron Rodgers
   GB, QB
   $59,515,000
2. Deshaun Watson
   CLE, QB
   $46,000,000
3. Patrick Mahomes
   KC, QB
   $40,450,000
4. Kyler Murray
   ARI, QB
   $39,000,000
5. Dak Prescott
   DAL, QB
   $31,000,000

He’s worth more than 3 of them.

Obviously the money dropoff is huge, but I'd personally take Dak over Lamar. I sometimes think he (like many before him) gets overanalyzed for being the Cowboys QB. That said, it doesn't seem like guys like Jones and Carr are settling for Dak money, so good luck getting Lamar to.

 

[osubuckeyeman]

Just tag him. If he wants to walk away from 32 million or 45 million so be it. I prefer the non-exclusive and see what happens. If he sits you sign a free agent that fits the OC offense and roll. I think they should tag and trade and go after the QB the OC wants on the market (or draft) and be done with it. There is a pretty big market for him. You can also draft one or even two in the mid-rounds or later and see what happens. If they do it now they will get more considering all the teams that want him. They can also determine to make a move and get someone in the draft they really want if they are willing to pay the cost. The whole fear of losing your job creates a fear that I think handcuffs teams. The NFL is a lose-your-job business it is going to happen and fear of losing your job can handcuff you or paralyze you into doing what is not right for the franchise. The team has all the leverage if it wants to exercise the options afforded to them. I'm not saying do not be reasonable and fair if you want Lamar to be your guy by all means pay him a fair and reasonable amount. A franchise can not allow being held hostage by any one player. Just because the Browns did a stupid contract if that's what you think they did does not mean you have to follow them into crazy town.

 

[Jakey]

Tag Lamar. A bad bet on a long term contract imo... not Kyler Murray kind of bad, but he is going to fall off a cliff one day.

Side comment - If I were the Bengals/Eagles/Chargers I would be rushing to sign my guy first. Bengals/Chargers to a Mahomes-like deal. Eagles 3-4 years.