QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (1 Viewer)

[Chaka]

Yes Jackson is literally the only QB who could get the Ravens to the Super Bowl, in 2023.

That's not necessarily the case for 24, 25...

Baltimore is a well managed franchise, I doubt they'd be irrelevant for years to come without him.

Two years at the minimum before they are relevant again. And that's only if they hit on their next QB.

Some franchises aren't relevant for 10-15 years at a time. What's 2 years if they set themselves up to compete for the next 8? And they're at best a notch below KC/CIN/BUF for the next 2 years anyways.

You're assuming it will only be two years.

The Ravens are is 3-4 vs Mahomes, Allen & Burrow when Lamar is starting.

 

[humpback]

You misunderstood. If he plays lights out under the tag in 2023, his contract next offseason (regardless of where) would likely be $50-$100 mil MORE than whatever he'd be able to sign now. So it easily could be better to get $45 mil in 2023 and $300+ mil in 2024 than to get $250 mil in 2023.

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon.

It's unclear what your silly comment is in response to- if you don't think he can play lights out next season then why should the Ravens give him a monster contract, and if you don't think his price would increase with a great, healthy season you're completely wrong IMO. In any event, it's obvious that playing under the tag absolutely could be in his best interest financially, but it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it so have a good one.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

 

[Chaka]

You misunderstood. If he plays lights out under the tag in 2023, his contract next offseason (regardless of where) would likely be $50-$100 mil MORE than whatever he'd be able to sign now. So it easily could be better to get $45 mil in 2023 and $300+ mil in 2024 than to get $250 mil in 2023.

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon.

It's unclear what your silly comment is in response to- if you don't think he can play lights out next season then why should the Ravens give him a monster contract, and if you don't think his price would increase with a great, healthy season you're completely wrong IMO. In any event, it's obvious that playing under the tag absolutely could be in his best interest financially, but it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it so have a good one.

Only suggesting that Lamar playing the "If/Then" game with his career would be foolish.

It may come down to Lamar playing under the tag but the game has far too many unpredictable variables and is far too violent to risk the ~$180 million in guarantees he could realize this season bases on the hope that he could make $50 more in '24?

What happens if he has a great year but blows out his ACL or Achilles in December? What's his 2024 contract look like then?

Worse, he could get Theismaned...or worse.

No, playing under the tag is a bad outcome for Lamar.

 

[Chaka]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

 

[Tau837]

it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it

 

[Chaka]

it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it

Nonsense.

Playing under the tag may happen if they can't reach terms, but it not in his best interest at all.

$45 mil is great for one year and a second year on the tag is a big bump too. But there is just a huge risk to that strategy.

Another reason it's not a great outcome is signing a big money deal this year gets him closer to the possibility of his next contract. He's 26 and would probably be looking at his next contract at 31-32, delaying that two years isn't ideal.

Whatever the case I am having an "honest conversation about it". Truly sorry if my propensity for being a smart ### isn't working for you.

 

[fatness]

The Ravens aren't a playoff team without Lamar Jackson.

If they dump him, bring in another QB, they're going to have to do a hell of a lot of spending to mask their other deficiencies.

 

[Chaka]

The Ravens aren't a playoff team without Lamar Jackson.

If they dump him, bring in another QB, they're going to have to do a hell of a lot of spending to mask their other deficiencies.

Obviously it depends on who they bring in but, and two first round picks goes a long way but I don't see Carr, Geno, Garoppolo being able to carry that offense as it's set up now... probably not Rodgers either at this point, unless he goes all in this off-season.

Maybe they can manage a trade for a top rookie QB this year or next with the extra draft picks.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

NFL News: NFLPA gives an advice to Lamar Jackson that Ravens won't like at all
... the NFLPA has addressed the situation with an advice for Lamar that the team won't like at all. The organization told the player to stand his ground in negotiations...

 

[-OZ-]

NFL News: NFLPA gives an advice to Lamar Jackson that Ravens won't like at all
... the NFLPA has addressed the situation with an advice for Lamar that the team won't like at all. The organization told the player to stand his ground in negotiations...

It seems to be in the interests of the NFLPA to get as many guaranteed contracts as possible for their players. Or at least to make it fairly normal. Maybe not in the player’s interest to hold out, but with Lamar, his worst case scenario is playing under the tag. More likely another team will be willing to make a deal.
The teams that were willing to back the truck up for Watson didn’t solve their QB issues although I wouldn’t think the Panthers would go heavy after Lamar. These teams might have balked at the full guarantee.
Overall It’s an interesting situation and I’d like to see Lamar get what he wants here.

 

[-OZ-]

The Ravens aren't a playoff team without Lamar Jackson.

If they dump him, bring in another QB, they're going to have to do a hell of a lot of spending to mask their other deficiencies.

Obviously it depends on who they bring in but, and two first round picks goes a long way but I don't see Carr, Geno, Garoppolo being able to carry that offense as it's set up now... probably not Rodgers either at this point, unless he goes all in this off-season.

Maybe they can manage a trade for a top rookie QB this year or next with the extra draft picks.

Honestly though, do any of them need to “carry” the offense for the team to succeed? Baltimore with Carr and more money to address other spots, imo, is a really good shot for a playoff spot.

 

[humpback]

You misunderstood. If he plays lights out under the tag in 2023, his contract next offseason (regardless of where) would likely be $50-$100 mil MORE than whatever he'd be able to sign now. So it easily could be better to get $45 mil in 2023 and $300+ mil in 2024 than to get $250 mil in 2023.

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon.

It's unclear what your silly comment is in response to- if you don't think he can play lights out next season then why should the Ravens give him a monster contract, and if you don't think his price would increase with a great, healthy season you're completely wrong IMO. In any event, it's obvious that playing under the tag absolutely could be in his best interest financially, but it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it so have a good one.

Only suggesting that Lamar playing the "If/Then" game with his career would be foolish.

It may come down to Lamar playing under the tag but the game has far too many unpredictable variables and is far too violent to risk the ~$180 million in guarantees he could realize this season bases on the hope that he could make $50 more in '24?

What happens if he has a great year but blows out his ACL or Achilles in December? What's his 2024 contract look like then?

Worse, he could get Theismaned...or worse.

No, playing under the tag is a bad outcome for Lamar.

Yes, he could get hurt and it could come back to bite him. However, it also could go well and put an extra ~$100 mil in his pocket. Without a crystal ball, we don't "know" how it would work out, therefore we can't say that "we know" it isn't in his best interest. It absolutely could be even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Honestly though, do any of them need to “carry” the offense for the team to succeed? Baltimore with Carr and more money to address other spots, imo, is a really good shot for a playoff spot.

Recall the epic playoff game?
NFL owners may be able to 'reach' the playoffs but know they'll eventually have to compete against QBs of this caliber which leads to the question at the bottom of this tweet.
-----------------------------------------------
Daniel Jeremiah@MoveTheSticks

The BUF/KC playoff game was a turning point moment in the NFL. The quality of QB play was off the charts and it had to hit home with every HC/GM/Owner.
=======================
Is my QB good enough to compete with that???
Buffalo Bills Highlights vs. Kansas City Chiefs | 2021 Playoffs Divisional Round 2
2001/23/2022

 

[humpback]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

No one I know would consider that sustained playoff success. Of course you can argue that they have a "chance", just like I can argue that they have a "chance" without him, but they certainly haven't achieved it with him.

That "playoff caliber offense" was 16th in ypg and 19th in ppg this year and their QBs accounted for ~4100 yards and 23 TDs COMBINED. Is it really inconceivable that they could approximate that with a different QB plus adding multiple high level players? Hypothetically, Carr, Hopkins, Addison, plus another future 1st and 2nd round pick say couldn't put up something like that?

 

[Bracie Smathers]

It’s almost like (B) the browns intentionally screwed other teams and their negotiations

...no, ...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.

When they made the deal that wasn't the reason or even part of it however NOW they can do things to make moves to help them manage the cap while making it more difficult for their competitors, especially those within their division.
------------------------------------------------
Jack Duffin
@JackDuffin

Expect a #Browns Watson restructure to come after March 7th, why?
Since Lamar’s exclusive franchise tag is the average of the top 5 QBs it will cost the Ravens an extra $3,748,600 by waiting

 

[Boston]

NFL News: NFLPA gives an advice to Lamar Jackson that Ravens won't like at all
... the NFLPA has addressed the situation with an advice for Lamar that the team won't like at all. The organization told the player to stand his ground in negotiations...

This is such a big piece of this situation...the Union is always going to do what is best for the Union...anyone who is in one or has had dealings with one knows this...it is in the best interest of the Union to have guaranteed contracts be the norm in the NFL...right now Watson has one but that is an outlier until there is another one...if there is going to be another one the best bet is it comes from one of the franchise QBs like Lamar, Burrow or Herbert...since Lamar does not have an agent the Union will have the most influence over him and his negotiations so there is a chance that they are more concerned with doing what is right for the Union than Lamar and without an agent he has no buffer...this thing can just go in so many different directions...I'm sure he has many advisors, but Lamar needs a legit agent as his point-person to look out for his best interests.

 

[jabarony]

Yes Jackson is literally the only QB who could get the Ravens to the Super Bowl, in 2023.

That's not necessarily the case for 24, 25...

Baltimore is a well managed franchise, I doubt they'd be irrelevant for years to come without him.

Two years at the minimum before they are relevant again. And that's only if they hit on their next QB.

Some franchises aren't relevant for 10-15 years at a time. What's 2 years if they set themselves up to compete for the next 8? And they're at best a notch below KC/CIN/BUF for the next 2 years anyways.

You're assuming it will only be two years.

The Ravens are is 3-4 vs Mahomes, Allen & Burrow when Lamar is starting.

You're assuming it will be more than 2 years.

Lamar has 1 playoff win - against TEN.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

It's funny how most quarterbacks are judged now more of what they do in the postseason than the regular season (see: most considering Joe Burrow a top 3 QB now despite no MVP or All-Pro finishes, because of 5 postseasons wins in the last two seasons and playing well in most of those games), yet with Lamar Jackson, it is "look at what he does in the regular season!" Granted, if I had his back, I'd be ignoring the postseason as well given that he is 1-3 in five seasons in the postseason and played terrible in all three losses (and was just solid in the one win). Like I said, if you think he is suddenly going to get better in the postseason for the Ravens when he makes a lot more money and the team around him isn't as good as a result, more power to ya, but I don't see it. Their window to win consistently in the postseason with Lamar has closed.

 

[massraider]

How would any of that be in his best interest?

Doesn't blow his knee out during preseason?

Right... because I mentioned him playing in preseason... because it is a given that he would blow his knee out in any playing time he would have if he doesn't resist signing the tag until the last possible second.

That's a tool answer.

Look, the best thing for the on field performance of the Ravens is probably not the same thing as the best thing for Lamar, financially.

The Ravens will franchise him, even tho that probably isn't the best thing for the team, to have their QB playing on a one year deal he isn't thrilled about.

But that's leverage they have, and they are using it. Lamar is using the leverage he has. This is the crappy business side of the sport. Lamar is not under contract, he doesn't have to sign anything he doesn't want to. Lamar played his contract all the way out, including the 5th year option, and he still won't hit free agency, because the rules state they can franchise him for two more years. He is getting leverage for the first time in his career, and now he's the villain.

It's laughable, like people's understanding of the business side of football hasn't improved since they were in high school.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

No one I know would consider that sustained playoff success. Of course you can argue that they have a "chance", just like I can argue that they have a "chance" without him, but they certainly haven't achieved it with him...

Lamar has 1 playoff win - against TEN.

Lamar Jackson has been in the league for 5 years.
Lamar Jackson's playoff record is 1-3 in his first 5 years
-------------------
After 5 years here is the W/L playoff record of other NFL QBs.

-Matt Stafford - 0-1 Went on to win a SB a decade later with different team
Peyton Manning - 0-2 Went on to win a SB a decade later
Aaron Rogers Played 'sparingly' his first 3 seasons, took over his fourth year. Did not throw a pass in only playff game he made appearance that the Pack won. Went on to win a SB 7 years later
Drew Brees - 0-1 Went on to win a SB a decade later
John Elway - 0-2 Went on to win a SB 14 years later

What exactly do you think is playoff success for QBs in their first 5 years in the league?

 

[Tau837]

That's a tool answer.

You get what you give.

because the rules state they can franchise him for two more years

Technically, they can franchise him three times. Understand it may be cost prohibitive to do so, but it is a possibility.

It's laughable, like people's understanding of the business side of football hasn't improved since they were in high school.

Right. Obviously, those who don't share your perspective don't understand the football business.

 

[massraider]

You get what you give.

You asked a question, I answered it. He risks injury being on a one year deal. Nothing tool-ish about my answer.

 

[Chaka]

The Ravens aren't a playoff team without Lamar Jackson.

If they dump him, bring in another QB, they're going to have to do a hell of a lot of spending to mask their other deficiencies.

Obviously it depends on who they bring in but, and two first round picks goes a long way but I don't see Carr, Geno, Garoppolo being able to carry that offense as it's set up now... probably not Rodgers either at this point, unless he goes all in this off-season.

Maybe they can manage a trade for a top rookie QB this year or next with the extra draft picks.

Honestly though, do any of them need to “carry” the offense for the team to succeed? Baltimore with Carr and more money to address other spots, imo, is a really good shot for a playoff spot.

And two first round picks.

 

[Chaka]

Baltimore with Carr and more money to address other spots, imo, is a really good shot for a playoff spot.

As a lifelong Raiders fan I would honestly be rooting for that to happen but...I also feel like I am in a good position to say good luck with that.

 

[Chaka]

You misunderstood. If he plays lights out under the tag in 2023, his contract next offseason (regardless of where) would likely be $50-$100 mil MORE than whatever he'd be able to sign now. So it easily could be better to get $45 mil in 2023 and $300+ mil in 2024 than to get $250 mil in 2023.

And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon.

It's unclear what your silly comment is in response to- if you don't think he can play lights out next season then why should the Ravens give him a monster contract, and if you don't think his price would increase with a great, healthy season you're completely wrong IMO. In any event, it's obvious that playing under the tag absolutely could be in his best interest financially, but it's equally obvious that you aren't interested in a honest conversation about it so have a good one.

Only suggesting that Lamar playing the "If/Then" game with his career would be foolish.

It may come down to Lamar playing under the tag but the game has far too many unpredictable variables and is far too violent to risk the ~$180 million in guarantees he could realize this season bases on the hope that he could make $50 more in '24?

What happens if he has a great year but blows out his ACL or Achilles in December? What's his 2024 contract look like then?

Worse, he could get Theismaned...or worse.

No, playing under the tag is a bad outcome for Lamar.

Yes, he could get hurt and it could come back to bite him. However, it also could go well and put an extra ~$100 mil in his pocket. Without a crystal ball, we don't "know" how it would work out, therefore we can't say that "we know" it isn't in his best interest. It absolutely could be even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

Of course and that is my point. It is absolutely not in Lamar's best interest to play under the tag because it carries so much uncertainty.

He bet on himself last season and should be happy he came out of it with a "push" as the outcome.

Look, I am not saying playing under the tag is the worst thing ever, it worked out fine for Kirk Cousins. You get paid top five money for two consecutive seasons and then it becomes cost prohibitive for the team to apply it a third time (if it isn't already the first two times) and you become a free agent. Two seasons under it would probably come out over $50 mil per season, and he becomes a FA after that in his age 28 season. Not too shabby. IF nothing goes sideways although Lamar's game is worlds apart from Kirk's. IF everything works out he comes out ahead.

The flip side is to get his $180 mil guaranteed (practical guarantees) today removes a ton of his future risk and, IF things go well he is looking at a new contract in his age 30-32 season instead of his age 32-34 season. IF everything works out that is probably no big deal but that age difference could also count for tens of millions of guaranteed dollars.

IF everything works out under each scenario it would ultimately pay out enough for each to call it a push. However, the scenario where he doesn't play under the tag carries less risk by an order of magnitude.

 

[Chaka]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

No one I know would consider that sustained playoff success. Of course you can argue that they have a "chance", just like I can argue that they have a "chance" without him, but they certainly haven't achieved it with him.

That "playoff caliber offense" was 16th in ypg and 19th in ppg this year and their QBs accounted for ~4100 yards and 23 TDs COMBINED. Is it really inconceivable that they could approximate that with a different QB plus adding multiple high level players? Hypothetically, Carr, Hopkins, Addison, plus another future 1st and 2nd round pick say couldn't put up something like that?

But you have to make the playoffs to be competitive in the playoffs. Saying Lamar makes the Ravens a playoff caliber team isn't an argument, it's a statement of fact.

Anything else is a game of Let's Make a Deal, maybe you get the new car, maybe you get the donkey. (People of a certain age will understand that reference, apologies to those who don't).

Is the argument that a 1-3 career playoff record means the 26 year old Lamar can never turn the corner? That seems wildly speculative.

 

[Chaka]

Yes Jackson is literally the only QB who could get the Ravens to the Super Bowl, in 2023.

That's not necessarily the case for 24, 25...

Baltimore is a well managed franchise, I doubt they'd be irrelevant for years to come without him.

Two years at the minimum before they are relevant again. And that's only if they hit on their next QB.

Some franchises aren't relevant for 10-15 years at a time. What's 2 years if they set themselves up to compete for the next 8? And they're at best a notch below KC/CIN/BUF for the next 2 years anyways.

You're assuming it will only be two years.

The Ravens are is 3-4 vs Mahomes, Allen & Burrow when Lamar is starting.

You're assuming it will be more than 2 years.

Lamar has 1 playoff win - against TEN.

No, my assumption is it will be a minimum of two years. After that, who knows?

I really have a real problem with the 1-3 playoff argument for a 26 year old QB. Does that mean the book is written on his career?

 

[-OZ-]

Honestly though, do any of them need to “carry” the offense for the team to succeed? Baltimore with Carr and more money to address other spots, imo, is a really good shot for a playoff spot.

Recall the epic playoff game?
NFL owners may be able to 'reach' the playoffs but know they'll eventually have to compete against QBs of this caliber which leads to the question at the bottom of this tweet.
-----------------------------------------------
Daniel Jeremiah@MoveTheSticks

The BUF/KC playoff game was a turning point moment in the NFL. The quality of QB play was off the charts and it had to hit home with every HC/GM/Owner.
=======================
Is my QB good enough to compete with that???
Buffalo Bills Highlights vs. Kansas City Chiefs | 2021 Playoffs Divisional Round 2
2001/23/2022

Honestly, I don’t think the ravens win the SB with Lamar either. He can turn it on with the best of then but there’s more risk with him than the truly elite.
If “success” means having a good chance to beat KC, CIN, AND BUF, almost no team is going to be successful any time soon. I would define success more broadly, YMMV.

 

[Chaka]

It's funny how most quarterbacks are judged now more of what they do in the postseason than the regular season (see: most considering Joe Burrow a top 3 QB now despite no MVP or All-Pro finishes, because of 5 postseasons wins in the last two seasons and playing well in most of those games), yet with Lamar Jackson, it is "look at what he does in the regular season!" Granted, if I had his back, I'd be ignoring the postseason as well given that he is 1-3 in five seasons in the postseason and played terrible in all three losses (and was just solid in the one win). Like I said, if you think he is suddenly going to get better in the postseason for the Ravens when he makes a lot more money and the team around him isn't as good as a result, more power to ya, but I don't see it. Their window to win consistently in the postseason with Lamar has closed.

First of all, if I was the Bengals I couldn't back the Brinks truck up to Burrow's door and empty it fast enough (I would pay that man whatever he asked).

I have not been ignoring Lamar's postseason record, I have mentioned it multiple times prior to today. What I wonder is why is that such a defining characteristic for a 26 year old QB? So many people are acting like that means his career has been written in stone based on that metric.

 

[Boston]

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

 

[humpback]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

No one I know would consider that sustained playoff success. Of course you can argue that they have a "chance", just like I can argue that they have a "chance" without him, but they certainly haven't achieved it with him.

That "playoff caliber offense" was 16th in ypg and 19th in ppg this year and their QBs accounted for ~4100 yards and 23 TDs COMBINED. Is it really inconceivable that they could approximate that with a different QB plus adding multiple high level players? Hypothetically, Carr, Hopkins, Addison, plus another future 1st and 2nd round pick say couldn't put up something like that?

But you have to make the playoffs to be competitive in the playoffs. Saying Lamar makes the Ravens a playoff caliber team isn't an argument, it's a statement of fact.

Anything else is a game of Let's Make a Deal, maybe you get the new car, maybe you get the donkey. (People of a certain age will understand that reference, apologies to those who don't).

Is the argument that a 1-3 career playoff record means the 26 year old Lamar can never turn the corner? That seems wildly speculative.

You're backtracking again, or at the very least moving the goal posts. You said "what's the path to sustained playoff success without Lamar?", which isn't the same as simply "playoff caliber". You're also ignoring the fact that they made the playoffs last year with a below average offense.

Of course that isn't the argument in showing his playoff record and you know it. It's simply a "statement of fact" and a consideration in whether they should pay him a record breaking contract, and whether they can find sustained playoff success if they did.

 

[Chaka]

How is it in the Ravens best interest to give the player who is literally, not figuratively, their only chance to make a Super Bowl a low ball offer?

We can complain about Lamar allegedly, but not actually proven, wanting a $250 mil guaranteed (or something like that) but we have similar reports that the Ravens came at him with a below market guarantee of $133 million.

We can talk about how a $250 million guarantee may, possibly hamstring the team and limit their chances to build a complete roster but you know what will almost guarantee them being irrelevant in their division for the next three seasons at least? Letting Lamar leave. Let's see how far they get paying Jimmy Garoppolo or Derek Carr $35 mil/year. My guess is just far enough to guarantee they won't get a shot at a top rookie QB.

How is it in the best interest of the franchise?

We have no idea what the offer(s) actually were or when they were offered so we can't characterize them as "low ball" or below market. He allegedly said himself that they offered $160-$180 mil guaranteed, but again, they're the only ones who really know the specifics.

So you're saying they'd wind up in about the same place as they are with him, with a much better chance at a shot at a top rookie QB with the draft picks they get back?

Fair enough but we do know it is not in Lamar's best interest to play for anything less than a fair market deal. Not his fault that he is plausibly a top 5 QB in the NFL (please let's not do lists. bottom line is he is in the conversation). Those guys get top of market deals every single season, why should he play for less?

Lamar is their best player, by a wide margin. I'm not sure if we agree on that but it is very clear IMO.

What is the path to sustained playoff success over the next 3-5 years without him? I could see Carr, Geno or Jimmy G having success there, but I could also easily see that as a path to draft picks in the late teens early twenties each of the next 3-5 seasons. And they come with $30+ million/year contracts as well. Even so those three probably won't be available by the time the Ravens and Lamar figure things out. Maybe the path is to blow it up and suck for Caleb in 2024.

To be clear I don't think the Ravens should offer $250 mil guaranteed, if that is what Lamar is holding out for (and we have no idea if he really is) but that first offer of $133 mil guaranteed, if that is what the Ravens offered (and we have no idea if they really did) is an insult.

Again, how do we know that? If he plays under the tag and has a lights out season that could easily be in his best interest. He'd make the ~$45 mil this year alone and probably end up with an additional $50-$100 mil in a deal next offseason. That's essentially what he tried to do this offseason, bet on himself, but it didn't pan out.

Also again, they haven't had sustained playoff success over the last 5 years with him at an insane discount, including when he was the MVP but got stomped in their first playoff game. Now have him go from taking up ~$2 mil in cap space like he did that season to ~$50 mil, and you think that's a recipe for sustained playoff success? I think a much better case could be made for say Carr or Geno, plus a player like say Hopkins to even out the cap hit, plus the several high draft picks they would receive from trading him.

We know that because it's worse to get $45 million in 2023 than $180 million (or whatever) in 2023.

Sustained playoff success is very difficult, the point is that with Lamar they have that chance. Dude is a clear difference maker with a 71% career win %.

Do they? Jackson has been with the Ravens for five seasons...and they have one playoff win. One. If one thinks he is magically going to turn that around in the immediate future AND figure out to stay healthy, more power to them, but I don't see it. The Ravens window to make deep playoff runs with him has closed.

Yes, they do. To suggest otherwise is narrow thinking to the point of absurdity.

They went to the playoffs 3 times in the last 4 seasons and we're 8-4 in 2021 when Jackson got hurt after 4 pass attempts against the Browns in their 13th game.

He absolutely is the sole reason the Ravens have a playoff caliber offense every single year.

No one I know would consider that sustained playoff success. Of course you can argue that they have a "chance", just like I can argue that they have a "chance" without him, but they certainly haven't achieved it with him.

That "playoff caliber offense" was 16th in ypg and 19th in ppg this year and their QBs accounted for ~4100 yards and 23 TDs COMBINED. Is it really inconceivable that they could approximate that with a different QB plus adding multiple high level players? Hypothetically, Carr, Hopkins, Addison, plus another future 1st and 2nd round pick say couldn't put up something like that?

But you have to make the playoffs to be competitive in the playoffs. Saying Lamar makes the Ravens a playoff caliber team isn't an argument, it's a statement of fact.

Anything else is a game of Let's Make a Deal, maybe you get the new car, maybe you get the donkey. (People of a certain age will understand that reference, apologies to those who don't).

Is the argument that a 1-3 career playoff record means the 26 year old Lamar can never turn the corner? That seems wildly speculative.

You're backtracking again, or at the very least moving the goal posts. You said "what's the path to sustained playoff success without Lamar?", which isn't the same as simply "playoff caliber". You're also ignoring the fact that they made the playoffs last year with a below average offense.

Of course that isn't the argument in showing his playoff record and you know it. It's simply a "statement of fact" and a consideration in whether they should pay him a record breaking contract, and whether they can find sustained playoff success if they did.

And I feel like you're nitpicking here.

Is the 1-3 playoff record the bottom line for you? Do you see no path to ever being anything but 1-3 playoff QB? Career is over, done, written in stone? Best to just move on from him?

I don't and, yes I absolutely see making the playoffs 3 times in 4 seasons as "playoff success" (8-4 with Lamar in the one season they didn't make it). You don't win in the playoffs if you don't make the playoffs. As a Raider fan I assure you it is far better to be the Ravens. That's my stance, no goal post has been moved.

 

[humpback]

That's a tool answer.

Look, the best thing for the on field performance of the Ravens is probably not the same thing as the best thing for Lamar, financially.

The Ravens will franchise him, even tho that probably isn't the best thing for the team, to have their QB playing on a one year deal he isn't thrilled about.

But that's leverage they have, and they are using it. Lamar is using the leverage he has. This is the crappy business side of the sport. Lamar is not under contract, he doesn't have to sign anything he doesn't want to. Lamar played his contract all the way out, including the 5th year option, and he still won't hit free agency, because the rules state they can franchise him for two more years. He is getting leverage for the first time in his career, and now he's the villain.

It's laughable, like people's understanding of the business side of football hasn't improved since they were in high school.

First of all, if I was the Bengals I couldn't back the Brinks truck up to Burrow's door and empty it fast enough (I would pay that man whatever he asked).

I have not been ignoring Lamar's postseason record, I have mentioned it multiple times prior to today. What I wonder is why is that such a defining characteristic for a 26 year old QB? So many people are acting like that means his career has been written in stone based on that metric.

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

A few examples showing why some of us don't think some in the "pay Lamar" camp are interested in having an honest conversation about things. Essentially no one is saying he's the villain, that his career in the post-season has been written in stone, or that anything other than a championship means you're a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by. They're absurd strawmen that do nothing to promote reasonable conversation.

I'd reiterate what's been said in here over and over about how I think he's a very good QB who I'd like the Ravens to give a huge just not record breaking guaranteed contract to but you'd likely just ignore it and spin it into something entirely different again so why bother?

 

[humpback]

And I feel like you're nitpicking here.

Is the 1-3 playoff record the bottom line for you? Do you see no path to ever being anything but 1-3 playoff QB? Career is over, done, written in stone? Best to just move on from him?

I don't and, yes I absolutely see making the playoffs 3 times in 4 seasons as "playoff success" (8-4 with Lamar in the one season they didn't make it). You don't win in the playoffs if you don't make the playoffs. As a Raider fan I assure you it is far better to be the Ravens. That's my stance, no goal post has been moved.

Shocker, another straw man as I was typing my post. I won't even address the absurdity other than "of course not", as I've said before.

We can agree to disagree on that. I don't consider 1 playoff win in 5 years sustained playoff success (you left out sustained). I'll point out that once again, you ignored the fact that they made the playoffs this year with an average offense at best and below average QB play. That isn't impossible to replace.

I do agree that it is far better to be the Ravens than the Raiders, which is why those who are bashing the organization in here crack me up. They've won super bowls with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer at QB, you would think that would buy them some credibility. If they decide that paying Lamar a massive guaranteed contract isn't what's best for the team I'll trust them over a bunch of honks posting on a message board.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

If “success” means having a good chance to beat KC, CIN, AND BUF, almost no team is going to be successful any time soon.

Can't agree with the definition of success if that definition means that only three AFC teams have a good chance to be successful soon.
I think Baltimore can beat any of those teams provided they have Lamar Jackson.

 

[massraider]

Essentially no one is saying he's the villain, that his career in the post-season has been written in stone, or that anything other than a championship means you're a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by. They're absurd strawmen that do nothing to promote reasonable conversation.

This isn't true because you say it is. YOU might not think that, and that's fine.

 

[Boston]

That's a tool answer.

Look, the best thing for the on field performance of the Ravens is probably not the same thing as the best thing for Lamar, financially.

The Ravens will franchise him, even tho that probably isn't the best thing for the team, to have their QB playing on a one year deal he isn't thrilled about.

But that's leverage they have, and they are using it. Lamar is using the leverage he has. This is the crappy business side of the sport. Lamar is not under contract, he doesn't have to sign anything he doesn't want to. Lamar played his contract all the way out, including the 5th year option, and he still won't hit free agency, because the rules state they can franchise him for two more years. He is getting leverage for the first time in his career, and now he's the villain.

It's laughable, like people's understanding of the business side of football hasn't improved since they were in high school.

First of all, if I was the Bengals I couldn't back the Brinks truck up to Burrow's door and empty it fast enough (I would pay that man whatever he asked).

I have not been ignoring Lamar's postseason record, I have mentioned it multiple times prior to today. What I wonder is why is that such a defining characteristic for a 26 year old QB? So many people are acting like that means his career has been written in stone based on that metric.

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

A few examples showing why some of us don't think some in the "pay Lamar" camp are interested in having an honest conversation about things. Essentially no one is saying he's the villain, that his career in the post-season has been written in stone, or that anything other than a championship means you're a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by. They're absurd strawmen that do nothing to promote reasonable conversation.

I'd reiterate what's been said in here over and over about how I think he's a very good QB who I'd like the Ravens to give a huge just not record breaking guaranteed contract to but you'd likely just ignore it and spin it into something entirely different again so why bother?

Sorry but that is an honest conversatio…you just have your mind up already which is fine.

 

[Grahamburn]

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

1-3 playoff record. Back to back seasons only playing 12 games. Unable to suit up for his team in the playoffs this past season. I do know at least one standard for being a high end QB is actually being available to play in your team's games.

 

[Chaka]

A few examples showing why some of us don't think some in the "pay Lamar" camp are interested in having an honest conversation about things. Essentially no one is saying he's the villain, that his career in the post-season has been written in stone, or that anything other than a championship means you're a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by. They're absurd strawmen that do nothing to promote reasonable conversation.

I really wish you would stop saying this. Frankly it's rude and dismissive. The same logic could be applied to the constant refrain about Lamar being 1-3 in the playoffs.

If my, at length, well considered responses are proof that I am having an honest conversation. Apologies if one off-hand comment about my grandmother led you to believe otherwise.

 

[Chaka]

And I feel like you're nitpicking here.

Is the 1-3 playoff record the bottom line for you? Do you see no path to ever being anything but 1-3 playoff QB? Career is over, done, written in stone? Best to just move on from him?

I don't and, yes I absolutely see making the playoffs 3 times in 4 seasons as "playoff success" (8-4 with Lamar in the one season they didn't make it). You don't win in the playoffs if you don't make the playoffs. As a Raider fan I assure you it is far better to be the Ravens. That's my stance, no goal post has been moved.

Shocker, another straw man as I was typing my post. I won't even address the absurdity other than "of course not", as I've said before.

We can agree to disagree on that. I don't consider 1 playoff win in 5 years sustained playoff success (you left out sustained). I'll point out that once again, you ignored the fact that they made the playoffs this year with an average offense at best and below average QB play. That isn't impossible to replace.

I do agree that it is far better to be the Ravens than the Raiders, which is why those who are bashing the organization in here crack me up. They've won super bowls with Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer at QB, you would think that would buy them some credibility. If they decide that paying Lamar a massive guaranteed contract isn't what's best for the team I'll trust them over a bunch of honks posting on a message board.

That's not a straw man, it's a question. Let me rephrase: Is Lamar's 1-3 playoff record the primary factor in determining whether or not the Ravens should keep him or move on. It is constantly thrown out there as a counter to the argument that Lamar is a 70.7% winning QB (including playoffs).

And I think it is fair to suggest that they made the 2022 playoffs because Lamar helped the offense the team to a 7-4 record. Similar to 2021 when he led them to an 8-4 record which they could not elevate to a playoff appearance without him.

The Ravens are a playoff team with Lamar. Who know what they are with Carr, Geno, Jimmy or a rookie under center.

 

[Chaka]

Essentially no one is saying he's the villain, that his career in the post-season has been written in stone, or that anything other than a championship means you're a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by. They're absurd strawmen that do nothing to promote reasonable conversation.

This isn't true because you say it is. YOU might not think that, and that's fine.

Gotta think of a diplomatic word to, hopefully prevent others from misinterpreting my intent. I'm going to go with "diminish"

The playoff record does get thrown around a lot as reason to diminish Lamar as a player.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Is this true?

-If the Ravens franchise tag him, the exclusive franchise tag, that essentially is the end of the story in 2023...or is it?
-The Ravens would pay Jackson somewhere in the $45M range this year? It's guaranteed and then Jackson would come back in '24 with likely larger numbers on an extended deal.

The Ravens can push it off and they've been clear they are protecting the franchise and they will "try" to accommodate Lamar Jackson.
That doesn't sound like they are willing to cave to a Watson like contract any time soon.
As much as I would like to see Jackson play hard ball, feels more like the Ravens are preparing to use the franchise tag and have been for a while now.
The Ravens are not passive participants in all of this, they are fully aware of what they are doing or attempting. .

 

[Chaka]

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

1-3 playoff record. Back to back seasons only playing 12 games. Unable to suit up for his team in the playoffs this past season. I do know at least one standard for being a high end QB is actually being available to play in your team's games.

As a whole that is a fair assessment. I don't put nearly as much weight on the playoff record as some because I am not going to fault anyone for not being Mahomes (or Burrow), as that is an unfair standard to live up to. I like Josh Allen but the book is still out on him IMO and I don't quite put him in the category of Mahomes or Burrow. Again, that is hardly an insult but he's closer to Herbert & Lamar in my book. All of whom are in the conversation for top of the market deals.

 

[massraider]

Is this true?

-If the Ravens franchise tag him, the exclusive franchise tag, that essentially is the end of the story in 2023...or is it?
-The Ravens would pay Jackson somewhere in the $45M range this year? It's guaranteed and then Jackson would come back in '24 with likely larger numbers on an extended deal.

The Ravens can push it off and they've been clear they are protecting the franchise and they will "try" to accommodate Lamar Jackson.
That doesn't sound like they are willing to cave to a Watson like contract any time soon.
As much as I would like to see Jackson play hard ball, feels more like the Ravens are preparing to use the franchise tag and have been for a while now.
The Ravens are not passive participants in all of this, they are fully aware of what they are doing or attempting.

If they use non-exclusive, they would get two #1 picks from whoever signs him. Which is obviously not enough. A trade is definitely a possibility. The Ravens have basically said, just because Jimmy Haslem is a donkey who hands out fully guaranteed deal doesn't mean WE need to.

I still think the most likely outcome is he plays under the franchise tag. Only because BAL might need to find another Haslem out there.

I also think that the owners in general are probably pushing for any team that has a QB contract coming up to play hardball. They want Watson to be an aberration, not the new norm. BAL I am sure is willing to play hardball, and I am sure the NFL fully supports them playing hardball.

Haslem at the owners meetings must be like the new kid in school, sitting by himself at lunch.

 

[Chaka]

Is this true?

-If the Ravens franchise tag him, the exclusive franchise tag, that essentially is the end of the story in 2023...or is it?
-The Ravens would pay Jackson somewhere in the $45M range this year? It's guaranteed and then Jackson would come back in '24 with likely larger numbers on an extended deal.

The Ravens can push it off and they've been clear they are protecting the franchise and they will "try" to accommodate Lamar Jackson.
That doesn't sound like they are willing to cave to a Watson like contract any time soon.
As much as I would like to see Jackson play hard ball, feels more like the Ravens are preparing to use the franchise tag and have been for a while now.
The Ravens are not passive participants in all of this, they are fully aware of what they are doing or attempting. .

Absolutely the Ravens are playing this in a way that is best for the franchise and the entire NFL ownership is watching this unfold intently.

For all my defense of Lamar as a player, I wouldn't give him a 5 year fully guaranteed contract. I don't blame him for trying but I definitely don't blame the Ravens for their stance. (for those who may think I am "moving the goal posts" I have always had this position about the guaranteed contract. I have also always said that Lamar should hold out for every penny he can get. I am still hoping they can find a way to meet in the middle, as I always have).

What I didn't like was the contract in the $133 mil fully guaranteed at signing that he was offered. It fell in the middle of the Murray & Wilson deals and that simply isn't the way NFL contracts work for marquee players. It may have been a great deal depending on when in the league year future years were guaranteed, but we don't know how that played out in reality. I think they Ravens and Lamar missed an opportunity to give Lamar a slightly better fully guaranteed offer than Russell Wilson received (effectively $180 million years guaranteed with the way future years were structured).

Now they are playing this game of tag and I honestly don't see it being resolved. My guess is the Ravens recognize Lamar represents their best chance to win in 2023 and they will tender him with the exclusive tag and hope Lamar shows up for the offseason program. The problem is even OTCs and TC represent an injury risk that probably isn't wise for Lamar to take so it probably leads to the scenario where Lamar signs in the 11th our and the plan doesn't work out great for anyone. Maybe the Ravens eke into the playoffs and catch fire but that's a huge longshot with no offseason work for Lamar in a new offense.

Barring catastrophic injury or a highly improbably Super Bowl run we end up right back where we are today in 2024.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Is this true?

-If the Ravens franchise tag him, the exclusive franchise tag, that essentially is the end of the story in 2023...or is it?
-The Ravens would pay Jackson somewhere in the $45M range this year? It's guaranteed and then Jackson would come back in '24 with likely larger numbers on an extended deal.

The Ravens can push it off and they've been clear they are protecting the franchise and they will "try" to accommodate Lamar Jackson.
That doesn't sound like they are willing to cave to a Watson like contract any time soon.
As much as I would like to see Jackson play hard ball, feels more like the Ravens are preparing to use the franchise tag and have been for a while now.
The Ravens are not passive participants in all of this, they are fully aware of what they are doing or attempting.

If they use non-exclusive, they would get two #1 picks from whoever signs him. Which is obviously not enough. A trade is definitely a possibility. The Ravens have basically said, just because Jimmy Haslem is a donkey who hands out fully guaranteed deal doesn't mean WE need to.

I still think the most likely outcome is he plays under the franchise tag. Only because BAL might need to find another Haslem out there.

I also think that the owners in general are probably pushing for any team that has a QB contract coming up to play hardball. They want Watson to be an aberration, not the new norm. BAL I am sure is willing to play hardball, and I am sure the NFL fully supports them playing hardball.

Haslem at the owners meetings must be like the new kid in school, sitting by himself at lunch.

Owners meetings and kick off luncheon

Table #8 in the back
Seat 1-Daniel Snyder
Seat 2-Stephen Ross
Seat 3-Jimmy Haslam
Seat 4-Bill Bidwell

 

[massraider]

For all my defense of Lamar as a player, I wouldn't give him a 5 year fully guaranteed contract.

Yes. I love Lamar, but I wouldn't do it either.

There is a difference between what I think is best for the Ravens, and understanding why Lamar is asking what he's asking for.

 

[Boston]

It is funny how the new standard of being a high-end QB is excellence with anything other than a championship meaning you are a failure and it is all on you regardless of what you are surrounded by.

1-3 playoff record. Back to back seasons only playing 12 games. Unable to suit up for his team in the playoffs this past season. I do know at least one standard for being a high end QB is actually being available to play in your team's games.

I agree with that point and if the Ravens have durability concerns about him that is a legit reason to be leery of a monster deal…it is also a tangent to the overall point about being judged about playoff success….two different things.

 

[LawFitz]

Ravens would be fools to think they could give him the non-exclusive tag and pay him just $32 MM in 2023. Multiple teams would be racing to the podium to hand them the two first rounders and Lamar his Brinks truck. Ravens aren't fools. Exclusive tag and trade seems like the most likely scenario here, unless they can bridge the contract gap and keep him for themselves.

"Our current guess is that, unless the exclusive franchise tender dips below $40 million, the Ravens will be inclined to go the non-exclusive route.

In lieu of waiting for someone who drafts lower in round one signing Jackson to an offer sheet (or having him sign an offer sheet after the 2023 draft, putting 2024 and 2025 first-round picks in play), the Ravens could accept a top-10 pick and maybe a second-rounder or a third-rounder in 2023, or perhaps a conditional pick in 2024 based on Jackson's playing time in 2023." - Mike Florio

Late first rounders aren't anywhere near the same value as early first rounders. Teams that would be happy to give up their late first rounder this year to steal Lamar:

(16) Deadskins, (18) Lions, (19) Bucs, (20) Seahawks, (26) Giants, and maybe (30) Niners