DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Ravens/Jackson end contract talks

To say that Rosen, Darnold, or Baker could have done what Allen did in the playoffs if only they had been drafted by Buffalo is blasphemy. Again, the alternative universe is a real thing. LOL

Hey! They stole that from me! I said that numerous times before he was drafted.

They were having fun w/it, but man, it is not far from the truth.

I do worry about him burning out. They mentioned Cam Newton and how people used to say he could endure the hits due to his size, but he was basically done by age 30. Andrew Luck was another big strong guy and he played behind one of the worst OLs in football. Took all kinds of big shots. He retired early to being beaten down. I think the Bills need to pick and choose more w/Allen.

I love his attitude. Dude was getting up smiling after huge collisions last night........but those hits take a toll after several years.

For the record........I am not talking about Allen because he was my guy before the draft. I didn't even pay much attention to him because I heard he was inaccurate. My choice was Josh Rosen. I yi yi yi................he ended up being the worst of the bunch.

Yeah, they do take a toll, but I think it's hard to take a player like that and try to teach him to ignore open space in front of him. Teach him to slide, teach him to take a chunk and run OB, that's fine. And to be accurate -- he's still a work in progress where those situations are concerned. Let's be honest, he's as big or bigger than almost any LB or safety in the league, and it's hard to take the "ball" out of "baller".

I've seen him take some big hits, pop up, and just give a little smile and a stare at the defender still lying on the turf. It seems strange to say, because he's a QB, but recently I've been more confused as to why defenders are still trying to tackle him high. 🤔🤣

Not sure what that means?

Just standing back there, no matter your size, isn't the way to get hit. You aren't in any position to cover up like you can if you are moving a bit..

But claiming an environment of continuity in system and coaching isn't a huge contributing factor in a QB's development isn't the alternative universe after you've sworn it was for so many years isn't? Dear God man.

I'm not sure but I'll take a stab at it. There was a certain poster on this board who gushed over JG. How he thought the Browns should go after him. How he was a better QB than Baker and it wasn't close. That same poster used the fact that Baker was on the market so long as a weapon to vilify Baker's value. At the same time Baker ended up being traded and is a starting QB in the NFL. San Fran found no trade partner for JG and he has been relegated to be their back up QB. JG took a much larger pay cut to stay on in San Fran as their back up than Baker. Not a peep out of that poster about it. As it ends up, obviously every other team who is in need of an upgrade at QB didn't see this the same as that poster did.

Pretty much 100%

Yep - saying Hue and the Browns would have ruined Lamar and Josh is not the same as saying Baker or Rosen or Darnold would replicate what either has done with the Ravens or Bills. But you know - change the argument when you can't win the one you started right?

If that were the case on the Browns, Jimmy Haslam would have cut him, and before that 3rd season.
(Why the heck is there a thread on the ravens and lamar?)

I. That doesn't have anything to do with anything in the NFL. There are millions of players who "genuinely care about their teammates and playing the game the right way." and if they can't get the job done they don't make NFL rosters.

2nd. Objection: that is all speculation on what Jackson feels or cares about.
(Why is there a topic on the ravens and lame r. )

Ravens need to pay the man. He gets Ws. period.

My hope is that they end up paying him what he wants, or they let him walk. I believe either of those situations would help the Browns.

Good point. I am hoping they let him walk, but I don't think there is any way they let that happen.

Wow!!!

What an insulting offer if that is indeed that actual offer. That's less guaranteed money than Kyler Murray and $32M less in guaranteed money than Mr. Unlimited.

My hope is the Ravens botch this and Jackson is moved out of the division. If they cannot reach a deal by the start of next season it'd be interesting to see if the Ravens would give Jackson the non-exclusive franchise tag to see if they can get two first round picks in return if another team signs him. Teams would jumps at only having to give up two first round picks.

Is it a money thing with Biscotti? Or is it a Ravens contract philosophy thing?

Lamar Jackson: "Don't low ball me bro, I know what I have."

I think it's because they believe once his running skills diminish, he won't be as effective as a QB for them, so they will take 1 or 2 years of franchising him, and then replace him, right about the time those skills diminish.

My guess is it is a Biscotti thing. I see Biscotti not wanting to be responsible for a second record breaking fully guaranteed contract to further cement a new contract standard. He'd rather play nice with the other owners and stay in good graces in the good ol' boys club. Keep as much money in their pockets and out of the players.

Hmmm...hadn't thought about that.

You know.......there has been a lot of complaining about Watson's contract, but in the long run, it is probably going to end up benefiting them. This part of the report stood out to me:

I assume both. I remember part of the hubbub with Watson's contract is that the guaranteed portion (or a % of the guaranteed number) of the contract has to be held in escrow or something (translation: they basically have to pay up-front). Many owners don't have that kind of cheese just lying around for them to drop into an account.

If you click on the tweet, the report says that they were going to pay the guaranteed money up front.

Check this out:



and

What does guaranteed at signing even mean? His first year salary is $130+m?

I took it to mean that he would be paid the guaranteed money as soon as he signed the contract.

So a signing bonus?

Not saying you're wrong, but I didn't read it that way. I read it as saying that was the amount that would be guaranteed over the course of the contract once he signed it.

Maybe I am wrong? Look at this part again, though.



Yet, we know that both received more guaranteed money, right? What else could it mean?

It's that pesky little guaranteed issue that NFL QB's now have as leverage that they didn't have before. All any NFL contract is actually worth is the guaranteed portion and now there is a precedent of a fully guaranteed 230 million dollar contract on the table that was never there before. And the players know it. 133 mil. guarantee is a low ball offer if the report is true.

And it's not shocking that the NFL Players Assoc would tell any player they deserve more money and a bigger or fully guaranteed contract no matter who they are or the position they play.

It means that as soon as he signs, he is guaranteed to get it. No roster or performance conditions, etc...

It, however, does not mean that the gets that money AT signing. That would be a signing bonus that functions that way. Actual payment of the various chunks of guaranteed money can be scheduled for any point during the term of the contract, and wouldn't have to actually be paid until that time (and wouldn't count against the Cap until the requisite league year).... but, even if the contract was terminated before then, he would still be paid that money at that time and all unpaid guaranteed monies would accelerate forward onto the Cap using the standard rules for that.

Is it a money thing that Biscotti doesn't want to fully guarantee the entire contract? Or is it a Ravens contract philosophy to not fully guarantee an entire contract?

I don't think I can dumb it down any more than that. If you feel like responding and still don't understand the question, I give up.

Right? lol, they could have just asked his mom or girlfriend if they felt he deserved a fully guaranteed contract .... everything has a context.

I mean, the NFLPA isn't going to tell Brady Quinn to come back to the league and expect a fully guaranteed $150 million contract, but since the seal on fully guaranteed deals has been broken and Lamar is in the upper echelon, there's little chance that they wouldn't tell him that's what he should be getting. It's their job, afterall, to look out for players getting the most they can get; that's what unions are for.

Guaranteed at signing means that this is the total amount of the contract is fully guaranteed once the contract is signed regardless of whether or not the player is released in the future or has career ending injury. It is not the same as the actual signing bonus. Total guaranteed money if the total guaranteed total amount the player can earn should they remain on the roster. Certain bonus incentives such as work out and roster bonuses can be a part of the total guaranteed money.

Lamar Jackson would not get $133M at signing, it would simply mean he has $133M guaranteed regardless if he's traded, cut, injured, etc..

Look at Kyler Murray's and Russell Wilson Guaranteed at Signing money vs Total Guaranteed Money. Now look at the attached link and you'll see Watson contract and that the Total Guaranteed at Signing is = to the Total Guaranteed amount. That is what Jackson is looking for in his deal. As his contract is reported, he can only truly count on banking $133M.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/kyler-murray-29036/

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/russell-wilson-9885/

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/deshaun-watson-21753/

You'd probably have to ask them to get anything definitive, but I would venture a guess that it is equal parts of both.
NOBODY wants to fully guarantee a contract. There's plenty of good reasons it has never happened before now. Most of all is that no matter what happens, once that is signed, you're on the hook for ALL of that money.

Secondly, it's a LOT of money.
Now, the amount being spent per year IS LIMITED by the Cap and the Cap is set at a specific percentage of the league's shared revenues, so the money IS there to make it happen, but let's face it... nobody likes to hand over gigantic chunks of money, and especially so when the risk of "losing" all of that money goes up exponentially. One career-altering hit and you can kiss that all goodbye. He'd be done as a player, but you're still having to shell it all out.

Genie is out of the bottle, however. You can't un-scramble an omelette.

It's somewhat been unscrambled at least twice now - once for Murray and once for Russell...their deals weren't fully guaranteed.

My biggest curiosity is if Biscotti can afford it or not.

Oh, it's still scrambled; it's inevitable at this point.

Biscotti can afford it unless he's been throwing his money away. The way the salary cap is set up, an NFL team is effectively a license to print money.
If nothing else, 20% of all shared revenues go to the teams themselves and not the players. Then there are still the non-shared revenue streams of each team, and those are all his (after team expenses, of course).

What this means is that ALL of the money in EVERY player contract is already covered, even if every penny was actually paid out. Now, of course, money that doesn't end up getting paid out stays in his pocket AND the corresponding Cap space is reclaimed and rolled over to the next year, but, still, all of that money IS covered each league year. It is actually a lot easier for him to pay it if it ISN'T a signing bonus because all of it doesn't have to be paid in-full at signing. It's guaranteed, but doesn't get paid until the schedule says so. Additionally, since it is all covered by shared revenues, technically, he could probably arrange financing for it if he absolutely had to.

Just to clarify... (and I haven't read the entire thread, so bear with me if I repeat)

All guaranteed money goes into a dedicated fund at contract signing.

So, if I guarantee 10 players $3 million each, on the day the contracts are signed, I have to pony up $30 million. When Watson signed his fuly guaranteed Browns deal, Haslam had to sign over the full $290 to a dedicated account as part of the deal. The money doesn't immediately go to the player, but it is an account in order that an owner doesn't try to somehow back out of the deal later.