QB Lamar Jackson, BAL (14 Viewers)

[Chaka]

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

So, if I understand correctly, and I'm not sure I do, this is when Allen starts to gain leverage again (again assuming he is playing at a high enough level). Is that right?

This is incorrect. Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent. It doesn't harm the player, who gets paid the same total amount but gets the money sooner as a bonus rather than paid out as salary.

Interesting. That seems crazy but, and I swear I am not trying to simply turn everything into pro Lamar, that seems like kind of a justification for Lamar holding out for a fully guaranteed contract, doesn't it?

The flip side is if he keeps performing more of his contract becomes guaranteed, I guess.

Either way, the way NFL contracts work seems very ###$$$ up.

 

[Tau837]

Interesting. That seems crazy but, and I swear I am not trying to simply turn everything into pro Lamar, that seems like kind of a justification for Lamar holding out for a fully guaranteed contract, doesn't it?

No, it's not. If the team can convert salary into bonus in a simple restructure, the player gets paid sooner and gets paid the same amount total. Same amount, paid sooner to the player. How could that be a justification for Jackson (or any player) holding out? Compared to status quo, it favors the player.

 

[GregR]

Assuming, of course he is still playing at a QB1-12 level (roughly) so at that point either Allen agrees to restructure or begins to hold the teams feet to the fire, assuming they want to be competitive going forward.

This is incorrect. Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent. It doesn't harm the player, who gets paid the same total amount but gets the money sooner as a bonus rather than paid out as salary.

I don't think this is right. Neither side can change contract terms without the agreement of the both sides.

However, my understanding is that a lot of contracts include prior consent from the player for the team to convert future money into an immediate signing bonus. Since that is only to the player's benefit to get paid earlier and be able to invest it and make more off of it.

But they consented when they agreed to a contract that stipulated the team could do that. Not all contracts have that.

Fair enough. My impression is most, if not all contracts include this prior consent, and that is what my comment is based on. Because it is beneficial to the player, why wouldn't a player agree to it up front?

This refers to "simple restructures." Restructures that go beyond simple restructures (e.g., including void years) are different and require agreement. But simply restructures are by far the most common, and simple restructure is what I was referring to in my earlier post.

I'd be interested to know examples of players who did not agree to this in their contracts and why, but I assume this is scarce knowledge.

Only thing I found is someone commenting that Suh had language that let the Dolphins only restructure his contract once. After that they'd have to get permission.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Colts continue to be the front runner if a trade happens.
--------------------------------------------------------
FMIA: What the First Four Teams Will Do on Draft Night...
1. Carolina. Bryce Young...
2. Houston. Texans have to pick a quarterback. Or do they?
... it’s far more likely Houston stays at two and gives its fans the long-term quarterback the franchise has been seeking
3. Arizona. DO NOT trade the pick till draft night, if at all.
... Will Anderson
4. Indianapolis. Colts are a mystery team right now.
...four straight years without a playoff win.
That brings us to Lamar Jackson. After Jackson tweeted last week that he’d asked to be traded, there was speculation the Colts would be interested, in part because of the desperation of owner Jim Irsay. And if the guarantees weren’t stupid, I think the Colts would be interested. My bet is the Ravens would take the fourth pick in the draft, solely, for Jackson...
...Re: a trade-down, it would help Ballard if Georgia’s Jalen Carter weren’t such a scarred prospect. Multiple teams would want to move up for Carter the player, but perhaps not Carter the person. So the Colts may not get a great offer at four
------------------------------
Deciphering who could be in, and out, for a potential deal for Lamar Jackson

Indianapolis Colts​

The team who most consider the front-runner in the Lamar Jackson sweepstakes would be the Indianapolis Colts. When asked about the team’s intentions, GM Chris Ballard said the team is interested in Jackson...
------------------------------
The Biggest Potential NFL Trades That Could Still Happen in 2023
The Indianapolis Colts still feel like a logical landing spot for Jackson, though. Indy needs a long-term answer at quarterback, Jackson would be a great fit in Shane Steichen's offense, and general manager Chris Ballard admitted that the Colts are considering Jackson.
...The Colts might be more inclined to make a move after the draft if they're unwilling to part with the fourth overall selection and/or don't find a quarterback they like at No. 4.
The Ravens could hold out for more than the two first-round picks by threatening to match Indianapolis' offer sheet but offering to trade Jackson for additional compensation. If Indy stands to improve significantly—therefore making its 2024 and 2025 first-round picks low selections—Baltimore could want a little extra in the deal.
Alternatively, the Colts could strike a bargain with Jackson and the Ravens, execute a trade for less than two first-round picks and then extend the quarterback before the July 17 deadline.

 

[pollardsvision]

What we have yet to see......do many teams want expensive 30+ year old running QB's?

Maybe they won't play out their contracts, but Allen is signed through age 32, with Watson and Murray through age 31,

Good point.
I'm not sure I'd call Watson a "running QB', at least anywhere near Lamar's class. He'll likely never ever run for 500 yards in a season again.

Either way, he and Murray were given contracts that the team will almost certainly regret. Not helping Lamar at all.

I'm on record saying Allen's contract is going to be a problem long-term. I know most don't agree. He's Cam Newton 2.0, IMO.
Nothing about this will age well if he's still Buffalo's main runner and goal line running back a few years from now.

But yes, you're right, apparently some teams will. 2 of the 3 will almost absolutely regret it. I'd say the other probably will.

And of the many ways that timing is hurting Lamar here, Watson and Murray really hurt.

Whether teams should give out the contracts they do really isn't what I have been arguing. Teams do stupid things all the time (whether that be for running, passing, or otherwise mediocre QBs. I don't think Lamar is worth $50M . . . but I don't think most of the QBs in the league are worth what they make.

I have a feeling many teams in the league are starting to come around to this. Another reason the timing here sucks for Lamar.

After decades of "pay a good QB whatever it costs", it seems to be shifting (rapidly) to "if you don't have Mahomes, you're better off with a solid guy on a rookie deal or a serviceable vet on a short deal you can get out of quickly"

Compared to a couple decades ago, the kids coming in are more prepared and much, much cheaper.

It used to be that it was hard to recover from missing on a highly drafted QB. Now, that's no big deal at all. Now, the thing that's hard to overcome is tying up a bunch of money on a pretty good vet.

 

[pollardsvision]

Oddly, the Browns were smart enough not to give Baker a massive deal. In 2012, most teams would've.

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson.

 

[LawFitz]

Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent.

Is the italicized true? Save for rare exceptions where specified language is written into a deal, I don't think this statement is accurate.

 

[Tau837]

Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent.

Is the italicized true? Save for rare exceptions where specified language is written into a deal, I don't think this statement is accurate.

But the language exists in most NFL contracts. At least, that is my understanding. Why wouldn't the players agree to that language? They get the same amount of total money, they get the amount of salary restructured sooner, and it becomes more costly for their teams to release a restructured player in later years of his contract. Plus, it is a mechanism that can improve the roster, and thus chance of winning, at least in the short term. Those are all positives for the player.

 

[menobrown]

Teams can restructure contracts unilaterally without player consent.

Is the italicized true? Save for rare exceptions where specified language is written into a deal, I don't think this statement is accurate.

Teams can do a simple restructure without player consent.

Most restructures we see fall under this category. When you just take the salary and pay it out into a bonus to spread it out.

If a team wanted to do something like add voidable years to a deal then for that they would need the consent of the player.

 

[menobrown]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

 

[ghostguy123]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

Unfortunately the cap hit won't be as reasonable

 

[Tau837]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

I know you said APY here, but his cap hits in 2024-2026 are $64M each year. I suppose it is possible that could look like a bargain by 2026, but I'm skeptical.

 

[Chaka]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

I know you said APY here, but his cap hits in 2024-2026 are $64M each year. I suppose it is possible that could look like a bargain by 2026, but I'm skeptical.

Okay, you two are contract guys so can't the Browns keep converting salary to bonus and split hits over two seasons for as long as Watson is on the team?

I read the Bucs could have try to get Brady to sign a one year sham contract to split his cap hit over two seasons.

 

[menobrown]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

I know you said APY here, but his cap hits in 2024-2026 are $64M each year. I suppose it is possible that could look like a bargain by 2026, but I'm skeptical.

Let me clearer. It will look like a bargain the second Herbert, Burrow and Lamar's extensions are signed and all of them are making $4-5M plus more then Watson in APY. This will of course happen well before 2026.

It's already reasonable because it's the same as Kyler, less then Wilson and Rodgers, only $5M per year more then Daniel Jones.

The cap hit is not really relevant, it sure is not to the player in negotiations. That's just how they chose to structure the deal for their cap space. Just because the Browns want to pay with future cap space over current should not be a factor in analyzing the totality of the deal IMO. That's just how the team chooses to budge.

 

[menobrown]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

I know you said APY here, but his cap hits in 2024-2026 are $64M each year. I suppose it is possible that could look like a bargain by 2026, but I'm skeptical.

Okay, you two are contract guys so can't the Browns keep converting salary to bonus and split hits over two seasons for as long as Watson is on the team?

I read the Bucs could have try to get Brady to sign a one year sham contract to split his cap hit over two seasons.

Yes to the first question on Watson.

They can, and already have, also added a voidable year already to Watson's contract, a dummy year and will likely continue to either do that or extend Watson in a few years if both sides can agree.

Tampa had an option to split up the accelerated cap hit on Brady but they chose to not use it and just eat it all right now. This is a major reason in another thread last week, the Bijan thread, I was arguing that Tampa is not really trying to contend next year so much as put out a viable team that can compete while they take a year to clean up the books.

 

[Tau837]

Yet also dumb enough to give the massive deal to Watson

I think it's debatable how much they should have guaranteed him but the APY is reasonable right now and will likely start hitting bargain territory for the last 3 years of the deal.

I know you said APY here, but his cap hits in 2024-2026 are $64M each year. I suppose it is possible that could look like a bargain by 2026, but I'm skeptical.

Let me clearer. It will look like a bargain the second Herbert, Burrow and Lamar's extensions are signed and all of them are making $4-5M plus more then Watson in APY. This will of course happen well before 2026.

It's already reasonable because it's the same as Kyler, less then Wilson and Rodgers, only $5M per year more then Daniel Jones.

The cap hit is not really relevant, it sure is not to the player in negotiations. That's just how they chose to structure the deal for their cap space. Just because the Browns want to pay with future cap space over current should not be a factor in analyzing the totality of the deal IMO. That's just how the team chooses to budge.

I respectfully disagree that the cap hit is irrelevant. Normally, it matters to the extent that it makes it more likely a player will be cut or traded before playing out a contract. In Watson's case, since his contract is fully guaranteed, I suppose it may not matter.

I don't think the cap hits for Herbert, Burrow, or Lamar will come close to Watson in 2024, and I am skeptical they will be particularly close in 2025 also. Maybe 2026. But by then, the cap will have likely increased by $50M, which helps to mitigate for all of them by that point.

 

[-OZ-]

Colts continue to be the front runner if a trade happens.
--------------------------------------------------------
FMIA: What the First Four Teams Will Do on Draft Night...
1. Carolina. Bryce Young...
2. Houston. Texans have to pick a quarterback. Or do they?
... it’s far more likely Houston stays at two and gives its fans the long-term quarterback the franchise has been seeking
3. Arizona. DO NOT trade the pick till draft night, if at all.
... Will Anderson
4. Indianapolis. Colts are a mystery team right now.
...four straight years without a playoff win.
That brings us to Lamar Jackson. After Jackson tweeted last week that he’d asked to be traded, there was speculation the Colts would be interested, in part because of the desperation of owner Jim Irsay. And if the guarantees weren’t stupid, I think the Colts would be interested. My bet is the Ravens would take the fourth pick in the draft, solely, for Jackson...
...Re: a trade-down, it would help Ballard if Georgia’s Jalen Carter weren’t such a scarred prospect. Multiple teams would want to move up for Carter the player, but perhaps not Carter the person. So the Colts may not get a great offer at four
------------------------------
Deciphering who could be in, and out, for a potential deal for Lamar Jackson

Indianapolis Colts​

The team who most consider the front-runner in the Lamar Jackson sweepstakes would be the Indianapolis Colts. When asked about the team’s intentions, GM Chris Ballard said the team is interested in Jackson...
------------------------------
The Biggest Potential NFL Trades That Could Still Happen in 2023
The Indianapolis Colts still feel like a logical landing spot for Jackson, though. Indy needs a long-term answer at quarterback, Jackson would be a great fit in Shane Steichen's offense, and general manager Chris Ballard admitted that the Colts are considering Jackson.
...The Colts might be more inclined to make a move after the draft if they're unwilling to part with the fourth overall selection and/or don't find a quarterback they like at No. 4.
The Ravens could hold out for more than the two first-round picks by threatening to match Indianapolis' offer sheet but offering to trade Jackson for additional compensation. If Indy stands to improve significantly—therefore making its 2024 and 2025 first-round picks low selections—Baltimore could want a little extra in the deal.
Alternatively, the Colts could strike a bargain with Jackson and the Ravens, execute a trade for less than two first-round picks and then extend the quarterback before the July 17 deadline.

Makes sense that Arizona would wait, among other reasons there are certainly teams that would back the truck up for their preferred QB but would not for the 3rd guy on their list.
But it’s virtually a lock that they trade That pick. Could be to the colts.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Makes sense that Arizona would wait, among other reasons there are certainly teams that would back the truck up for their preferred QB but would not for the 3rd guy on their list.
But it’s virtually a lock that they trade That pick. Could be to the colts.

I don't think so.
I think that Will Anderson could go #2 to Houston, he's that good.
----------------------
Competition Factor
@CompFactor
One of our highest rated prospects EVER, @AlabamaFTBL's Will Anderson is easily our top edge prospect in the 2023 #NFLDraft. With a production score of 99.9, he could be a generational pass rush talent!
Follow @CompFactor for more NFL draft prospect rankings!

LINK to chart

 

[-OZ-]

Makes sense that Arizona would wait, among other reasons there are certainly teams that would back the truck up for their preferred QB but would not for the 3rd guy on their list.
But it’s virtually a lock that they trade That pick. Could be to the colts.

I don't think so.
I think that Will Anderson could go #2 to Houston, he's that good.
----------------------
Competition Factor
@CompFactor
One of our highest rated prospects EVER, @AlabamaFTBL's Will Anderson is easily our top edge prospect in the 2023 #NFLDraft. With a production score of 99.9, he could be a generational pass rush talent!
Follow @CompFactor for more NFL draft prospect rankings!

LINK to chart

If big Will goes 2, that just raises the value of the 3.
I’m a big fan, but he’s on par with Garrett, the Bosa’s and chase young as a prospect. Would not take above Young or Stroud. I suppose the cardinals could stay but I’d be surprised if they didn’t receive enough for the pick from Seattle or Detroit, among others, to make the deal worthwhile.

 

[menobrown]

I respectfully disagree that the cap hit is irrelevant. It matters to the extent that it makes it more likely a player will be cut or traded before playing out a contract.

I truly don't think that applies to franchise QB's and really not most elite players who are playing at elite levels. Those are not the players who are cut or traded. It's the players making a lot of money not playing at the level they used to without with no guarantees that are at risk of being cut or traded.

Now I did mention earlier it's fair to question Watson's guarantees, but that's really only going to be an issue if his play or health declines. (Well I guess people could say if his play does not improve over what he showed last year but I still think that was an aberration)

I don't think the cap hits for Herbert, Burrow, or Lamar will come close to Watson in 2024, and I am skeptical they will be particularly close in 2025 also.

I'd agree. It certainly won't be for Herbert for a team that has a ton of cap issues to work out over the next year or two. Typically on longer term deals these players don't have large cap hits the first year or two of the deal. The tradeoff for Watson having close to $64M cap hits the last 3 years of his deal as of now is that he only had cap hits of around $9 and $19 in 2022 and 2023. So comparatively speaking I would expect someone like Herbert to have a similar low cap hit the first two years of his deal, and I say him especially because I know the Chargers have kicked a ton of cap commitments into the future, the Bengals not as much.

 

[Tau837]

I truly don't think that applies to franchise QB's and really not most elite players who are playing at elite levels. Those are not the players who are cut or traded. It's the players making a lot of money not playing at the level they used to without with no guarantees that are at risk of being cut or traded.

Now I did mention earlier it's fair to question Watson's guarantees, but that's really only going to be an issue if his play or health declines. (Well I guess people could say if his play does not improve over what he showed last year but I still think that was an aberration)

Agree it doesn't typically happen to elite players who play at elite levels throughout the periods of their contracts.

We have seen these 'franchise' QBs traded or released before the end of their contracts in recent years: Watson, Wilson, Carr, Stafford, Goff, Tannehill, Wentz, Mayfield. Rodgers is apparently going to be another one, and it will probably happen to Tannehill again.

There is a spectrum of ages and performance in that group; I'm certainly not saying all of them are elite, though many of them were elite at times or at least the face of their franchises. I think for most of them, maybe all, their teams expected they would play out their contracts at the time they were signed. Circumstances changed, and they didn't.

This is a perfect microcosm of why owners don't want fully guaranteed contracts. For all of the QBs in my list, their teams were able to move on from them early in part because their contracts were not fully guaranteed, and most of the guarantees occurred during the first few years of their contracts.

Bringing it back to Jackson, how likely is it that there are many (any?) teams willing to take the chance that Jackson's play will be elite all the way through 2027? That would be the gamble they would have to take to provide him with a 5 year fully guaranteed contract in which he would likely be guaranteed $60M+ in 2026 and 2027.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

If big Will goes 2, that just raises the value of the 3.
I’m a big fan, but he’s on par with Garrett, the Bosa’s and chase young as a prospect. Would not take above Young or Stroud. I suppose the cardinals could stay but I’d be surprised if they didn’t receive enough for the pick from Seattle or Detroit, among others, to make the deal worthwhile.

Fun draft speculation time.
CJ or Bryce goes #1. Speculation may be that Houston wanted whoever went first but can't pass EDGE William Anderson so they take him at #2 and THEN sign QB Lamar Jackson to a large contract with an enormous guarantee so Baltimore would not match.
Since they would have taken Anderson with their own 1st round pick this year, by CBA agreement they would be bound to only give up their own 1st round draft selections in 24 and 25 or higher 1st round picks than their own 1st round selections.
They could come out of this draft with, William Anderson AND Lamar Jackson, and whomever they take with the Browns first round selection.

They could have two cornerstones, a generational pass rusher and a proven QB IMHO and still have a high 1st round pick this year and they'd own a 1st round pick next year.
Makes too much sense for it to happen but it's fun to speculate.

 

[menobrown]

Bringing it back to Jackson, how likely is it that there are many (any?) teams willing to take the chance that Jackson's play will be elite all the way through 2027? That would be the gamble they would have to take to provide him with a 5 year fully guaranteed contract in which he would likely be guaranteed $60M+ in 2026 and 2027.

Looks like no one to me.

 

[-OZ-]

If big Will goes 2, that just raises the value of the 3.
I’m a big fan, but he’s on par with Garrett, the Bosa’s and chase young as a prospect. Would not take above Young or Stroud. I suppose the cardinals could stay but I’d be surprised if they didn’t receive enough for the pick from Seattle or Detroit, among others, to make the deal worthwhile.

Fun draft speculation time.
CJ or Bryce goes #1. Speculation may be that Houston wanted whoever went first but can't pass EDGE William Anderson so they take him at #2 and THEN sign QB Lamar Jackson to a large contract with an enormous guarantee so Baltimore would not match.
Since they would have taken Anderson with their own 1st round pick this year, by CBA agreement they would be bound to only give up their own 1st round draft selections in 24 and 25 or higher 1st round picks than their own 1st round selections.
They could come out of this draft with, William Anderson AND Lamar Jackson, and whomever they take with the Browns first round selection.

They could have two cornerstones, a generational pass rusher and a proven QB IMHO and still have a high 1st round pick this year and they'd own a 1st round pick next year.
Makes too much sense for it to happen but it's fun to speculate.

Even if they signed Lamar (highly doubtful) they wouldn’t be “coming out of the draft” With him. They might have him five days later but you can’t really consider him part of the draft.

But yes, I think your plan works in theory for any team needing a QB with cap space.

 

[Anarchy99]

Bringing it back to Jackson, how likely is it that there are many (any?) teams willing to take the chance that Jackson's play will be elite all the way through 2027? That would be the gamble they would have to take to provide him with a 5 year fully guaranteed contract in which he would likely be guaranteed $60M+ in 2026 and 2027.

Looks like no one to me.

I say all the time, we don't know what we don't know. This hasn't fully played out yet, so to conclude no team is interested seems a bit premature. As already outlined, there are any number of reasons why things remain the same for Lamar for now. Teams may feel the Ravens would match any offer and thus they don't want to waste the time. Teams may feel they are better off to acquire Jackson through trade instead of an offer sheet. Maybe interested teams don't have the cap room available and are figuring out how to free up some space. Teams may be waiting to see how the draft falls and make a draft day trade. Teams may want to use their high draft pick this draft and then try to sign Jackson leveraging lower-level first round picks from the 24 and 25 drafts.

As I indicated the other day, guys like Allen, Watson, and Murray are signed until they will be 31 or 32. If Jackson signed a 4-year deal, that would cover him up until his age 29 season. Those other guys will carry cap hits of $56M to $64M a season between now and then. IMO, there is a big difference between 29 and 31 or 32, and there is lot of ground to cover to get from the one year, $32M franchise tag number and a deal that would get Lamar to cap hits in the $56M to $64M range.

 

[menobrown]

I say all the time, we don't know what we don't know. This hasn't fully played out yet, so to conclude no team is interested seems a bit premature.

That's the company line people were trying to say before FA even started and all the teams said they were out. I said at the time I did not think they were bluffing and now that we are 3 weeks past FA I think it's time to accept that we do know.

And to be clear I did not say no one wants Lamar, of course teams want him. The question I responded to was who is going to give him a contract with the guarantees for 5 years.. Again I'll say we got enough info to know, the answer is no one is going to guarantee him 5 years or $230m plus. Not now, not this off-season. When his demands get more in line, and he actually has way to convey that to teams, then movement will start but his demands/lack of agent has already cost him valuable time and shrunk his list of possible teams that have already made commitments. As Stephen Holder reported last week, from what found out at the league meetings Lamar's current contract demands are a non-starter.

 

[Chaka]

The question I responded to was who is going to give him a contract with the guarantees for 5 years.

It's a great question but, at this point does anyone, with confidence, know this is the true demand?

I think a lot of teams who may be interested in Lamar also consider that, after acquiring Lamar, maybe the 2023 draft pick has more, potential, value than their 2024 draft pick.

Using Atlanta as an example, I think we all agree they will have a lower 1st round draft pick in 2024 than 2023 with Lamar than with Desmond Ridder (if you think otherwise I question your intellectual honesty) so why trade for him before the draft?

Upon reflection it makes a lot of sense that teams would be vocally out on acquiring Lamar because any team in a position to want/need him would be improved enough by his presence to not want to also sacrifice their advantage in the 2023 draft.

Why give up picks 9 & 19 (for example) when you can give up picks 19 & 23, or whatever, over the next two seasons?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

If Not BAL Ravens, For Which NFL Team Will Lamar Jackson Take His Next Regular Season Snap? [2023 NFL Season]

Indy +225
Atlanta +330
Washington +650
Minnesota +700
New England +850
Tampa Bay +1000

 

[travdogg]

If Not BAL Ravens, For Which NFL Team Will Lamar Jackson Take His Next Regular Season Snap? [2023 NFL Season]

Indy +225
Atlanta +330
Washington +650
Minnesota +700
New England +850
Tampa Bay +1000

Atlanta has always made the most sense to me. Offense is pretty loaded other than QB. Great OL, good running game (which would only improve with Lamar) very talented young pass catchers (Pitts/London) and they have added 4 decent to very good defensive starters.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

If Not BAL Ravens, For Which NFL Team Will Lamar Jackson Take His Next Regular Season Snap? [2023 NFL Season]

Indy +225
Atlanta +330
Washington +650
Minnesota +700
New England +850
Tampa Bay +1000

Atlanta has always made the most sense to me. Offense is pretty loaded other than QB. Great OL, good running game (which would only improve with Lamar) very talented young pass catchers (Pitts/London) and they have added 4 decent to very good defensive starters.

They just spent $10MM on Heineicke which imo is already a waste of money - but it would be a poor use of cap space for him to backup a $50MM a year QB.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Speculation may be that Houston wanted whoever went first but can't pass EDGE William Anderson so they take him at #2

A different scenario starting with Houston selecting EDGE William Anderson.
It makes no sense to me.
What I would do is take the generational pass rusher and after that trade to land a top QB in his prime, THEN also land top-twelve prospect.
I would never gamble on a rookie QB over a young proven NFL quarterback in their prime especially when I'd also be passing on a top-twelve prospect knowing I would not be having to pay any draft capital until next year when I'd have an extra first-round draft pick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How 2023 NFL Draft Could Play Out If Texans Pass on QB with No. 2 Pick
...Houston can land the most dominant player in this year's draft class (Anderson) and could address quarterback with its other first-round pick. While at least three quarterbacks—Young, Stroud and Florida's Anthony Richardson—are expected to land in the top five, they aren't the only options with long-term starter potential.

 

[ghostguy123]

The question I responded to was who is going to give him a contract with the guarantees for 5 years.

Why give up picks 9 & 19 (for example) when you can give up picks 19 & 23, or whatever, over the next two seasons?

One reason might be to make sure you actually get him so that you're not stuck with crap at QB.
However, it seems teams aren't willing to both do the contract AND pay the two 1sts.......yet.
I have a feeling draft time is going to create a lot of Lamar activity (actual activity, not just reported activity).
I still think a tag and trade scenario would make the most sense for a team wanting Lamar, but again, that takes a lot of communication and coordination. Something an agent might be good at.

 

[menobrown]

How did each NFL team’s free agency moves stack up? Executives react to moves from all 32 teams

Which teams made sensible moves, which teams didn't, and how to make sense of the Lamar Jackson and Aaron Rodgers situations?

theathletic.com

I thought some of these Lamar related comments in an article from The Athletic where some anonymous league execs were asked questions on teams status/outlook after FA as interesting. I'll post some of them below for those that don't have access to the article, and again these comments are from the article, not my opinons:


As for the idea of collusion by league owners against the next fully guaranteed deal? “If Patrick Mahomes were in Lamar’s shoes, he would have 30 offer sheets, all guaranteed,” this exec said.

“The issue with Lamar is, the way he plays, no one has ever really played that way for a long time, and you have to completely change your team to do it,” another exec said. “That is fine on a rookie deal, but you are not doing it at $50 million after two injury-plagued years.”

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Colts continue to be the front runner if a trade happens.
--------------------------------------------------------
FMIA: What the First Four Teams Will Do on Draft Night...
1. Carolina. Bryce Young...
2. Houston. Texans have to pick a quarterback. Or do they?
... it’s far more likely Houston stays at two and gives its fans the long-term quarterback the franchise has been seeking
3. Arizona. DO NOT trade the pick till draft night, if at all.
... Will Anderson
4. Indianapolis. Colts are a mystery team right now.
...four straight years without a playoff win.
That brings us to Lamar Jackson. After Jackson tweeted last week that he’d asked to be traded, there was speculation the Colts would be interested, in part because of the desperation of owner Jim Irsay. And if the guarantees weren’t stupid, I think the Colts would be interested. My bet is the Ravens would take the fourth pick in the draft, solely, for Jackson...
...Re: a trade-down, it would help Ballard if Georgia’s Jalen Carter weren’t such a scarred prospect. Multiple teams would want to move up for Carter the player, but perhaps not Carter the person. So the Colts may not get a great offer at four
------------------------------
Deciphering who could be in, and out, for a potential deal for Lamar Jackson

Indianapolis Colts​

The team who most consider the front-runner in the Lamar Jackson sweepstakes would be the Indianapolis Colts. When asked about the team’s intentions, GM Chris Ballard said the team is interested in Jackson...
------------------------------
The Biggest Potential NFL Trades That Could Still Happen in 2023
The Indianapolis Colts still feel like a logical landing spot for Jackson, though. Indy needs a long-term answer at quarterback, Jackson would be a great fit in Shane Steichen's offense, and general manager Chris Ballard admitted that the Colts are considering Jackson.
...The Colts might be more inclined to make a move after the draft if they're unwilling to part with the fourth overall selection and/or don't find a quarterback they like at No. 4.
The Ravens could hold out for more than the two first-round picks by threatening to match Indianapolis' offer sheet but offering to trade Jackson for additional compensation. If Indy stands to improve significantly—therefore making its 2024 and 2025 first-round picks low selections—Baltimore could want a little extra in the deal.
Alternatively, the Colts could strike a bargain with Jackson and the Ravens, execute a trade for less than two first-round picks and then extend the quarterback before the July 17 deadline.

NFL Trade Rumors: Ravens Deal Lamar Jackson to Colts?
...The Colts feel like the one team without a legitimate plan for a starter ... unless it's a rookie.
That being said, the Colts sit in a very precarious position for the quarterback market at the top of the draft...
------------------------------------
The QB Dilemma Facing The Colts That Could Lead Them to Ravens' Lamar Jackson
... Is the prospect of drafting a quarterback who will need time to develop something the Colts don't want?
...if two quarterbacks are gone off the board, we know they need a quarterback, which one will they go with," Zierlein said. "Do they go with the developmental [Will] Levis or the developmental [Anthony] Richardson? Those are both guys that are going to take time.
"Will they get more aggressive and go with a guy who is not a developmental player in Lamar Jackson,
...long-time NFL writer Peter King stated, the money that Jackson would want can't be too steep for the Colts, and if it isn't, a straight swap for Jackson and the No.4 pick could take place.
-------------------------------------
Baltimore contingency plans do not look appealing.
------------------------
Jamison Hensley
@jamisonhensley
Teddy Bridgewater? Carson Wentz?
Ravens need contingency plan if Lamar Jackson sits out

 

[ghostguy123]

Seems about right. One team will panic a little during/after the draft and offer Lamar a deal, Ravens will panic and match it.
It just won't be the 233 million guaranteed that Lamar wants, IMO.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

Seems about right. One team will panic a little during/after the draft and offer Lamar a deal, Ravens will panic and match it.
It just won't be the 233 million guaranteed that Lamar wants, IMO.

If Lamar was willing to sign anything remotely reasonable, he would be signed already

 

[Chaka]

“The issue with Lamar is, the way he plays, no one has ever really played that way for a long time, and you have to completely change your team to do it,” another exec said. “That is fine on a rookie deal, but you are not doing it at $50 million after two injury-plagued years.”

Does this part truly hold up to scrutiny? You have to completely change your team? Really? Really? There is no other way to possibly incorporate a QB who can run very well and completes 63% of his passes into an offense? The entire team needs to go through a sea change! 100% roster turnover! Centers and defensive tackles living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!!

 

[Chaka]

It just won't be the 233 million guaranteed that Lamar wants, IMO.

Allegedly.

 

[travdogg]

If Not BAL Ravens, For Which NFL Team Will Lamar Jackson Take His Next Regular Season Snap? [2023 NFL Season]

Indy +225
Atlanta +330
Washington +650
Minnesota +700
New England +850
Tampa Bay +1000

Atlanta has always made the most sense to me. Offense is pretty loaded other than QB. Great OL, good running game (which would only improve with Lamar) very talented young pass catchers (Pitts/London) and they have added 4 decent to very good defensive starters.

They just spent $10MM on Heineicke which imo is already a waste of money - but it would be a poor use of cap space for him to backup a $50MM a year QB.

I mean, just because they did something stupid doesn't mean they shouldn't do something smart. I'd rather be spending 60 million at QB, than go in with Ridder/Heinicke.

My assumption is Heinicke is the backup already.

New England probably makes the 2nd most sense, if any of the Mac Jones rumors have truth to them.

 

[menobrown]

“The issue with Lamar is, the way he plays, no one has ever really played that way for a long time, and you have to completely change your team to do it,” another exec said. “That is fine on a rookie deal, but you are not doing it at $50 million after two injury-plagued years.”

Does this part truly hold up to scrutiny? You have to completely change your team? Really? Really? There is no other way to possibly incorporate a QB who can run very well and completes 63% of his passes into an offense? The entire team needs to go through a sea change! 100% roster turnover! Centers and defensive tackles living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!!

I'm sure he meant "the offense" but I actually left out the most hyperbolic comment from that article.

Not sure if you read it but another exec said something along the lines of "We all know he can't win in the playoffs". He did go on to say Baltimore should have worked something out with him two years ago because they had no better option, but it's that first line was a lot to take it. There are some fair criticisms IMO on Lamar but to say "We all know he can't in the playoffs" seems way over the top because "has not" is not the same as "can't" and "We all know" assumes everyone totally agrees he can't win in the playoffs. That's all a little much to me.

These articles were anonymous league execs get quoted are fun reads, they say some wild stuff, makes me think of a lot of them as meat heads. But there are for sure interesting and informative things you can pick up

 

[Chaka]

“The issue with Lamar is, the way he plays, no one has ever really played that way for a long time, and you have to completely change your team to do it,” another exec said. “That is fine on a rookie deal, but you are not doing it at $50 million after two injury-plagued years.”

Does this part truly hold up to scrutiny? You have to completely change your team? Really? Really? There is no other way to possibly incorporate a QB who can run very well and completes 63% of his passes into an offense? The entire team needs to go through a sea change! 100% roster turnover! Centers and defensive tackles living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!!

I'm sure he meant "the offense" but I actually left out the most hyperbolic comment from that article.

Not sure if you read it but another exec said something along the lines of "We all know he can't win in the playoffs". He did go on to say Baltimore should have worked something out with him two years ago because they had no better option, but it's that first line was a lot to take it. There are some fair criticisms IMO on Lamar but to say "We all know he can't in the playoffs" seems way over the top because "has not" is not the same as "can't" and "We all know" assumes everyone totally agrees he can't win in the playoffs. That's all a little much to me.

These articles were anonymous league execs get quoted are fun reads, they say some wild stuff, makes me think of a lot of them as meat heads. But there are for sure interesting and informative things you can pick up

Wow. I love the Athletic but articles like this are just tools to push agendas during NFL misinformation season.

 

[Tau837]

If Not BAL Ravens, For Which NFL Team Will Lamar Jackson Take His Next Regular Season Snap? [2023 NFL Season]

Indy +225
Atlanta +330
Washington +650
Minnesota +700
New England +850
Tampa Bay +1000

Atlanta has always made the most sense to me. Offense is pretty loaded other than QB. Great OL, good running game (which would only improve with Lamar) very talented young pass catchers (Pitts/London) and they have added 4 decent to very good defensive starters.

They just spent $10MM on Heineicke which imo is already a waste of money - but it would be a poor use of cap space for him to backup a $50MM a year QB.

I mean, just because they did something stupid doesn't mean they shouldn't do something smart. I'd rather be spending 60 million at QB, than go in with Ridder/Heinicke.

My assumption is Heinicke is the backup already.

New England probably makes the 2nd most sense, if any of the Mac Jones rumors have truth to them.

I agree with you about Atlanta making the most sense, which has been true from the start of this saga IMO. In addition to the pros you listed, a move like trading for Jackson could enable them to take control of their weak division for at least the next few years, with Tampa, Carolina, and New Orleans all in various states of rebuilding. They haven't made the playoffs since 2017, but this move would put them in position not only to make the playoffs, but host at least one playoff game each of the next few years. To me, they seem like the team that would get the best ROI on trading for Jackson, and it's not particularly close.

I'm less certain about New England.

Both of those teams would have some cap maneuvering to do to make it work.

 

[ghostguy123]

Seems about right. One team will panic a little during/after the draft and offer Lamar a deal, Ravens will panic and match it.
It just won't be the 233 million guaranteed that Lamar wants, IMO.

If Lamar was willing to sign anything remotely reasonable, he would be signed already

I couldn't agree less

 

[ghostguy123]

So teams that might be willing to pay a ton for him are talking down his value? No way. Mind bottling.
It would be crazy if they were in the media pumping up his value.
People, we know nothing about what is going on behind the closed doors in the room with the hooters and cup-a-joe

 

[-OZ-]

“The issue with Lamar is, the way he plays, no one has ever really played that way for a long time, and you have to completely change your team to do it,” another exec said. “That is fine on a rookie deal, but you are not doing it at $50 million after two injury-plagued years.”

Does this part truly hold up to scrutiny? You have to completely change your team? Really? Really? There is no other way to possibly incorporate a QB who can run very well and completes 63% of his passes into an offense? The entire team needs to go through a sea change! 100% roster turnover! Centers and defensive tackles living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!!

I'm sure he meant "the offense" but I actually left out the most hyperbolic comment from that article.

Not sure if you read it but another exec said something along the lines of "We all know he can't win in the playoffs". He did go on to say Baltimore should have worked something out with him two years ago because they had no better option, but it's that first line was a lot to take it. There are some fair criticisms IMO on Lamar but to say "We all know he can't in the playoffs" seems way over the top because "has not" is not the same as "can't" and "We all know" assumes everyone totally agrees he can't win oin the playoffs. That's all a little much to me.

These articles were anonymous league execs get quoted are fun reads, they say some wild stuff, makes me think of a lot of them as meat heads. But there are for sure interesting and informative things you can pick up

Seems especially ridiculous when he absolutely was not the reason they lost in 2020 (2019 season), dude had a decent game both as QB and running back. They just couldn’t stop the

The loss in 2021 (2020 season) could be on his shoulders but at least they won in the first round.

 

[Anarchy99]

Here is a breakdown of what Lamar is said to have turned down in 2022 . . . an offer that the Ravens apparently have pulled and is no longer on the table:

Insider reveals details on Ravens' pulled offer to Lamar Jackson​

Story by Sam Robinson, Pro Football Rumors • Yesterday 6:07 PM

Offseason No. 3 of the Ravens-Lamar Jackson contract story has produced the biggest headlines, which include the franchise tag and a trade request. But this saga’s second year included the clearest picture of Baltimore’s offer.

Long reported to have offered Jackson $133M fully guaranteed, the Ravens proposed the former MVP a deal with $175M in total guarantees. The $42M injury guarantee would have shifted to a full guarantee early over the course of the contract, Albert Breer of SI.com reports. An additional $25M — present in the fourth year of the contract — would have become guaranteed in Year 3 of the deal, Breer adds. Overall, that 2022 offer topped $290M over six years. The $175M in total guarantees would have topped Russell Wilson ($165M) for second in the league.

The year-out guarantees helped move the Patrick Mahomes-Chiefs extension past the goal line in 2020, and while that 10-year agreement is an outlier and rather team-friendly, the two-time MVP has protections via the advanced rolling guarantees. Mahomes joins most of the league’s franchise QBs in having signed an extension before his fourth season. Jackson joins Dak Prescott and Kirk Cousins in not doing so. Prescott, however, had a deal in place by this point in his career; he signed his Cowboys extension in March 2021. Jackson has played five seasons; no resolution is in sight.
Perhaps more importantly, given the time that has passed since the 2022 offseason — when the Ravens proposed the $175M guaranteed ahead of the Jackson-imposed negotiation deadline — Breer adds this deal is no longer on the table. The Ravens remain in fairly good position, even after their disgruntled QB’s trade request emerged, as no team has shown much interest in authorizing the monster guarantee he seeks. Baltimore has also been open to a Cousins-style short-term accord that would come fully guaranteed, per Breer, who adds Jackson is not set against one type of structure.

Cousins signed a three-year, $84M Vikings contract in 2018; that deal helped accelerate the QB market after it had moved slower in the years leading up to that point. Jackson indicated the Ravens have offered him a Cousins-like deal — a $133M fully guaranteed pact over three years — but the self-represented passer turned it down. Jackson, 26, has continually been linked to seeking a contract in the Deshaun Watson full guarantee neighborhood ($230M). With no other QB tied to more than $125M in full guarantees, Jackson and the Ravens have a substantial gap to bridge.

Jackson’s refusal to use an agent in these negotiations has generated scrutiny, and the Washington Post’s Jason La Canfora notes it has contributed to the sixth-year star being in this position. Since Jackson entered the league in 2018, Mahomes, Carson Wentz, Jared Goff, Josh Allen and Kyler Murray have signed big-ticket extensions to lock in windfalls before their fourth seasons. Joe Burrow, Jalen Hurts and Justin Herbert may join them this offseason. Watson earned unusual leverage to sign two deals before his sixth NFL campaign. Jackson played on his rookie salary in 2021 and the fifth-year option in 2022, putting him significantly behind his peers in earnings through five seasons. An agent might have helped prevent that outcome, and La Canfora adds some around the league believe a certified rep might also help provide clarity regarding the gridlock that has formed since the Ravens gave Jackson the $32.4M non-exclusive tag.

The Ravens remain on solid footing with Jackson in part because teams have lined up to say they are not interested, closing doors early. These paths might not remain barricaded all the way through the July 17 tag deadline, but they are presently closed. Jackson’s playing style has caused concerns about a short career, according to one executive assessing the Ravens offseason, via The Athletic’s Mike Sando. Despite Jackson missing 10 regular-season games from 2021-22, his 727 carries lap the field among QBs through five seasons. Cam Newton‘s 599 are second. Another exec added that if Mahomes were in this position, he would have 30 guaranteed offers.

Jackson’s injuries over the past two seasons and guarantee demands have frozen his market. The Ravens, meanwhile, want to bring back the former Heisman winner to play in new OC Todd Monken‘s scheme. A team’s draft not unfolding as planned might entice a post-draft offer sheet from another team, but for now, the Ravens are his only known suitor.

LINK

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Here is a breakdown of what Lamar is said to have turned down in 2022 . . . an offer that the Ravens apparently have pulled and is no longer on the table:

Insider reveals details on Ravens' pulled offer to Lamar Jackson​

Story by Sam Robinson, Pro Football Rumors • Yesterday 6:07 PM

Offseason No. 3 of the Ravens-Lamar Jackson contract story has produced the biggest headlines, which include the franchise tag and a trade request. But this saga’s second year included the clearest picture of Baltimore’s offer.

Long reported to have offered Jackson $133M fully guaranteed, the Ravens proposed the former MVP a deal with $175M in total guarantees. The $42M injury guarantee would have shifted to a full guarantee early over the course of the contract, Albert Breer of SI.com reports. An additional $25M — present in the fourth year of the contract — would have become guaranteed in Year 3 of the deal, Breer adds. Overall, that 2022 offer topped $290M over six years. The $175M in total guarantees would have topped Russell Wilson ($165M) for second in the league.

The year-out guarantees helped move the Patrick Mahomes-Chiefs extension past the goal line in 2020, and while that 10-year agreement is an outlier and rather team-friendly, the two-time MVP has protections via the advanced rolling guarantees. Mahomes joins most of the league’s franchise QBs in having signed an extension before his fourth season. Jackson joins Dak Prescott and Kirk Cousins in not doing so. Prescott, however, had a deal in place by this point in his career; he signed his Cowboys extension in March 2021. Jackson has played five seasons; no resolution is in sight.
Perhaps more importantly, given the time that has passed since the 2022 offseason — when the Ravens proposed the $175M guaranteed ahead of the Jackson-imposed negotiation deadline — Breer adds this deal is no longer on the table. The Ravens remain in fairly good position, even after their disgruntled QB’s trade request emerged, as no team has shown much interest in authorizing the monster guarantee he seeks. Baltimore has also been open to a Cousins-style short-term accord that would come fully guaranteed, per Breer, who adds Jackson is not set against one type of structure.

Cousins signed a three-year, $84M Vikings contract in 2018; that deal helped accelerate the QB market after it had moved slower in the years leading up to that point. Jackson indicated the Ravens have offered him a Cousins-like deal — a $133M fully guaranteed pact over three years — but the self-represented passer turned it down. Jackson, 26, has continually been linked to seeking a contract in the Deshaun Watson full guarantee neighborhood ($230M). With no other QB tied to more than $125M in full guarantees, Jackson and the Ravens have a substantial gap to bridge.

Jackson’s refusal to use an agent in these negotiations has generated scrutiny, and the Washington Post’s Jason La Canfora notes it has contributed to the sixth-year star being in this position. Since Jackson entered the league in 2018, Mahomes, Carson Wentz, Jared Goff, Josh Allen and Kyler Murray have signed big-ticket extensions to lock in windfalls before their fourth seasons. Joe Burrow, Jalen Hurts and Justin Herbert may join them this offseason. Watson earned unusual leverage to sign two deals before his sixth NFL campaign. Jackson played on his rookie salary in 2021 and the fifth-year option in 2022, putting him significantly behind his peers in earnings through five seasons. An agent might have helped prevent that outcome, and La Canfora adds some around the league believe a certified rep might also help provide clarity regarding the gridlock that has formed since the Ravens gave Jackson the $32.4M non-exclusive tag.

The Ravens remain on solid footing with Jackson in part because teams have lined up to say they are not interested, closing doors early. These paths might not remain barricaded all the way through the July 17 tag deadline, but they are presently closed. Jackson’s playing style has caused concerns about a short career, according to one executive assessing the Ravens offseason, via The Athletic’s Mike Sando. Despite Jackson missing 10 regular-season games from 2021-22, his 727 carries lap the field among QBs through five seasons. Cam Newton‘s 599 are second. Another exec added that if Mahomes were in this position, he would have 30 guaranteed offers.

Jackson’s injuries over the past two seasons and guarantee demands have frozen his market. The Ravens, meanwhile, want to bring back the former Heisman winner to play in new OC Todd Monken‘s scheme. A team’s draft not unfolding as planned might entice a post-draft offer sheet from another team, but for now, the Ravens are his only known suitor.

LINK

It all adds up to Lamar Jackson never playing another down of football in a Baltimore Browns uniform again

 

[travdogg]

I agree with you about Atlanta making the most sense, which has been true from the start of this saga IMO. In addition to the pros you listed, a move like trading for Jackson could enable them to take control of their weak division for at least the next few years, with Tampa, Carolina, and New Orleans all in various states of rebuilding. They haven't made the playoffs since 2017, but this move would put them in position not only to make the playoffs, but host at least one playoff game each of the next few years. To me, they seem like the team that would get the best ROI on trading for Jackson, and it's not particularly close.

I'm less certain about New England.

Both of those teams would have some cap maneuvering to do to make it work.

If all QBs were equal, I think the Falcons would have run away with the NFC South last season. I mean, they were 1 game out, with Mariota/Ridder. They would have won that division (probably by more than 1 game) if Jacoby Brissett was their QB. 100% agree Lamar would make them the clear favorite, unless the rookie Carolina takes really hits the ground running.

Lamar wouldn't have the same win/loss value in NE, but I do think he's a clear upgrade and Belichick loves him. Even with him though, there is no lock they wouldn't be 4th in that division.

Tennessee would make some sense too, if they don't want to start over completely, but it sounds like they are more looking at rookie QBs, and possibly trading up with Arizona. But that is another division that is very wide open for the taking. Indy too.

 

[Anarchy99]

Lamar wouldn't have the same win/loss value in NE, but I do think he's a clear upgrade and Belichick loves him. Even with him though, there is no lock they wouldn't be 4th in that division.

I have a hard time trying to figure out what NE is. In the coulda, woulda, shoulda category, they were very close to beating GB, MIN, LV, and CIN last year. I get it, they didn't win those games, but it is not a stretch to envision them as a potential 12-win team last year. That wouldn't make their dysfunction or talent level any better, but it might change the narrative that Bill has lost his fastball and the team is an unmitigated disaster without Brady. The biggest issue for the Patriots is all the other teams in their division (and other foes in the AFC) have actually built good teams and many other QBs are better than their own . . . something NE didn't have to worry about for many years. The evaluation issue is trying to figure out how close they are to winning close games, not making bonehead plays, and what pieces and tweaks they can make to be consistently good.

 

[ghostguy123]

NE seems to need a QB and WRs.