DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum QB Carousel

Lamar Jackson draws support from Deshaun Watson's agent amid contract dispute with Ravens

ESPN recently reported that Lamar Jackson wants a fully guaranteed deal, similar to Deshaun Watson’s five-year, $230 million contract with the Cleveland Browns. Watson’s agent, David Mulugheta, weighed in on social media and offered support to Jackson.

“… and @Lj_era8 deserves every guaranteed dollar he’s asking for!” Mulugheta said.

Lamar Jackson’s future with the Baltimore Ravens is one of the most intriguing storylines to watch in the NFL this offseason. ESPN noted that all of Jackson’s counter-offers have been north of $230 million, with all of it guaranteed. In September, the Ravens offered Jackson a $250 million contract with $133 million of it guaranteed and he turned them down.

Baltimore recently hired new offensive coordinator Todd Monken, who was asked about Jackson during his introductory press conference.

“He’s got an elite skillset. It’s obvious when you watch it on film,” Monken said at his introductory press conference. “I mean, the things he can do with the football and the plays that he makes. I think he’s underrated as a passer — I think so — in terms of his ability to make plays and throw it down the field.

“So, you’ve all seen it. I mean, I’m like you, I’m no different than you — I watch what you guys watch. And it’s pretty amazing.”

Jackson comes off a 2022 season in which he threw 17 passing touchdowns and seven interceptions along with 2,242 passing yards. He rushed for 764 yards and touchdowns. Jackson missed five regular-season games and the team's Wild Card loss in the playoffs with a knee injury. NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero noted a trade could also be on the table for the former Louisville star and Heisman Trophy winner.

"If the sides don't come to terms on a long-term deal before the March 7 tag deadline, the likelihood is still that Jackson plays in Baltimore," Rapoport explained in a report on NFL.com."Yet there are multiple ways Jackson could end up playing elsewhere in 2023. The Ravens could tag Jackson and explore options for a trade, with surely no shortage of suitors for one of the NFL's most dynamic talents. Jackson would effectively have veto power over his destination, since he'd need to sign the franchise tender to complete the deal and any team giving up the level of compensation would want to work out a contract."

In his five-year career in Baltimore, Jackson has thrown for 12,209 passing yards with 101 touchdowns and 38 interceptions. He rushed for 4,437 yards and 24 touchdowns. He was unanimously voted the league MVP in 2019.

Jackson, the No. 9 dual-threat quarterback in the 2015 class and a four-star prospect, signed Louisville and logged a monstrous career that ended with his No. 8 jersey retired with a spot in Louisville's Ring of Honor.

https://247sports.com/college/ohio-...fTZtK0EXGWwiryzGzEVthkNeg3ddFMj-n7X2p06U

Just a glimpse of what future contract negotiations with watson may look like by listening to his agent.

Depending on what Jackson, Herbert, and Burrow combined with Rodgers if traded and Carr get on their deals - I would not be a least bit surprised that if Watson has an elite year (whether the team wins or not), that he will attempt to hold out in 2024 or 2025 for a new more expensive deal, especially if the Browns have to start cutting players due to the cap that he deems as important. I hope Berry has a plan for this because I see it a coming without a doubt. IMHO, that's the problem when you wish for other teams to sign their QB's to mega deals. Your own franchise QB isn't going to allow that for long if he thinks he's better. JMHO, buyer beware on what you wish for on the Jackson, Burrow, and Herbert fronts.

Watson is not part of the QB Carousel. There is a Watson thread and plenty of other threads where the Salary Cap is being talked about ad-nauseum. Please, can you two not hijack this thread? Thanks.

Says the all-time hijacker of every thread. Waston is absolutely a part of the QB carousel (as the thread title denotes) because his contract and salary is spurring on some of the moves that may take place, particularly with Jackson. Excuse me if you want to police the post to only allow the topics you feel are relevant. Again, as per always, you are the hijacker of the post, just you being you!

Never said he'd be traded this year or a FA, a figment of your imagination and just another ploy to control the agenda. Watson's contract and salary absolutely has a bearing on the QB Carousel whether you approve or don't, just you being you!

If Watson has played well enough in 3 years that we want to extend him, I'm not going to worry too much about what he's asking...

If we don't make a few deep playoff runs with him at QB in the next three years then I hope we cut our losses and move on...

Back to the topic of the thread...

The Lamar situation is obviously huge. Another huge story is that the Jets want Aaron Rodgers. Their owner is on record as saying so. The Jets also brought in Derek Carr last week. They reportedly told him that they think he can be a HOFer if he wins big in New York.

Obviously, Rodgers is a better qb than Carr. The trouble is that Rodgers has not decided if he is even playing next year, although it is hard to believe that he would walk away from that kind of money. We also don't know if he wants to ultimately stay in Green Bay or go somewhere else. His contract is huge. GB would want the farm in return. Rodgers is older and isn't the most dependable guy. Would Rodgers even want to play in the Big Apple market? Some question that. Would Rodgers rather go to the Raiders and reunite w/Adams? Although, I don't think Rodgers and McDaniels personalities are a great match.

So, do the Jets wait on Rodgers and risk losing Carr to a team like New Orleans, Carolina, or Washington? It's a tough decision for them.

Back to the thread topic...

The other thing that is huge is obviously the draft.

This might not be totally accurate as there are always surprised, but the Texans, Colts, and Panthers have all been linked to drafting a QB high in the draft. I think we could probably include Atlanta as a possible candidate. There has also been some recent conversation about the Bears trading Fields and drafting Bryce Young. I think that would be moronic, but who knows. Washington needs a QB, but they are in the 16th slot and that isn't a good spot, even for making a trade w/a team near the top.

There are three QBs in this draft that figure to go in the Top 10. Young, CJ Stroud, and Will Levis. Some have Anthony Richardson rated highly, but he was not very productive in college and would be a developmental guy in my opinion.

I think Chicago stays w/Fields and trades the #1 overall pick to the Cots. They sit at #4 overall, so they are a desirable trading partner. Young seems to be the clear front runner for being that pick, but man, he is tiny. Look at all of Tua's injury and Young is way smaller than Tua.

I think the Texans definitely take a QB at #2. No idea who they value the most of the three.

Carolina is the next in line for a QB, but they sit at #9. Will that 3rd guy fall that far or will they have to move up a few spots to secure their QB? Or, do they settle for Carr provided he is available. Actually, he is available right now and hasn't signed w/anyone yet.

Lot's of intrigue.

He is a qb with a 79 rating on the Browns
Why is he not on the carousel?

He's under contract and will be playing this upcoming season for the Browns.

On another thread, Memphis posted a tweet that the Bears are open to trading the #1 overall pick. That would mean that Fields stays in Chicago. I would say the favorite to move up to #1 is Indy. Houston might sweeten the pot because they don't want Indy or another team like Carolina to jump them and take a qb, provided they are salivating over one of these guys. So, it looks like the #1 overall pick is going to be a qb this year. I don't think that team will need a bridge qb.

I still believe that Jackson will be on the trade market sooner than later. My guess is that the Ravens will never succumb to a guaranteed contract for 4-5 years with Jackson's injury history. JMHO, they'd be stupid if they did guarantee his deal totally. The other problem (I see this with the Browns too) is that there's not an out for the team if things go south for whatever reason. That''s why KCC was so brilliant in basing Mahomes contract after the first 3 years with roster bonuses. KCC has 6 years of zero dead cap if releasing Mahomes and 1 year of around 4.3M. What a brilliant deal and the team doesn't have to carry prorated bonuses (increasing each year) that handcuffs the team. Those roster bonuses can be renegotiated every year too without penalty.

Back to Jackson, I don't believe BAL is going to bend (not in their DNA). It is also my opinion that Jackson won't play under the franchise tag. He's looking for guaranteed security and a 1-year deal with the option of just being tagged again (like Cousins) is not something he'll be willing to accept. Just my opinion but the team that has the picks and cap space to pull off this type of trade is Chicago. They can give up this year's #1 overall, next year's 1st round pick, Fields, and this year's 2nd round pick for Jackson straight up. Then I would expect the Ravens to trade out of the #1 overall slot for as many picks as they can to add to their additional picks they received. The Bears get an older, wiser, and better passer at this stage in Jackson while the Ravens get a cheaper, younger Jackson clone in Fields with a number of draft picks to address their defense which slipped this past year and cash to hit the FA market since Fields is still on his rookie deal.

Former Raiders QB Derek Carr to meet with a 'handful' of teams during the NFL Scouting Combine this week

Published: Feb 27, 2023 at 07:57 PM
Coral Smith



Rapoport: Derek Carr slated to meet with 'a handful of teams' at NFL combine in Indy

Free-agent quarterback Derek Carr will be meeting with a "handful" of teams this week in Indianapolis during the NFL Scouting Combine, NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported, per sources, on Monday during an appearance on NFL Total Access.

On Tuesday morning, Rapoport reported that Carr will have in-person free agent meetings with the Jets, the Saints and the Panthers.

Carr, who was released by the Raiders on Feb. 14 after being benched for the final two games of the 2022 season, has already visited with the Saints and the Jets during his search for his next destination. And now Carr is taking advantage of every team converging during the combine in order to have talks with some other potential options.

Multiple teams are likely to be in the market for a new QB for 2023, but Carr has a time advantage over these other players. While other impending free-agent quarterbacks are required to wait until after the start of free agency on March 15 to sign somewhere, Carr could sign now due to being released by Las Vegas.

While Rapoport added that he expects Carr to sign with a team before then, the 31-year-old quarterback is not expected to be hasty with his decision, as there's still over two weeks before that date. His brother, David Carr, said last week on NFL Network that Derek wanted to do his "due diligence" by visiting as many places as possible to figure out the best landing spot, and suggested it would therefore be a "long process" to make his choice.

Which team he will land with is still up in the air, but it's clear that Carr is fulfilling his desire to take his time and talk with multiple teams to find the ideal fit. And the next step in this process will take him to Indianapolis this week.


https://www.nfl.com/news/former-rai...h-a-handful-of-teams-during-the-nfl-scou

Does this mean they are open to trading Rodgers?

More from Green Bay's GM, Brian Gutekunst talking about Rodgers...



Sounds to me like he is open to the idea of trading him.

It appears like the Jets and Raiders are the favorites to trade for Rodgers if he becomes available. I don't think GB would trade him to a NFC team. The Jets have a ton of talent and they would be formidable if they land Rodgers. Kinda sucks for Browns fans.

This seems like the same song and dance the Packers and Rodgers do every offseason. Jordan Love always comes out the loser.

I'll be very surprised if Rodgers is on any team but the Packers next year.

Not saying you're wrong because I have no idea how this will all unfold. But if there is a team who would move on it would be the Packers. Hell they moved on from Favre and he was still a very good QB at the time.

j/c:

Commanders release QB Carson Wentz after one season

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35748616/commanders-cut-qb-carson-wentz-one-season

The Bears would have to be complete idiots to make that trade.

Any team that wants Aaron Rogers better expect at best a
1 and done in the playoffs. For all his natural ability
He chokes in the playoffs. He isn't clutch at all when it matters
The most

WOW, not clutch- MVP FOUR times- you good evaluator of talent. He's past his prime- I wouldn't want he or Brady. Mayfield has LOTS of company trying to find an NFL QB job- ....AND, ask any of them and I'm a starter in NFL out of their mouths......LOTS of options this off season.

Wow-Za!

Reports are saying that Baltimore and Lamar are "not close" to getting a deal done. The deadline for slapping the tag on him is Tuesday, March 7th.

Thus, the Ravens are going to have to tag him. Again, there are two types of tags. The Exclusive Tag would guarantee Lamar $45.25 million per year. No other teams would be able to negotiate w/Lamar. The problem is that almost everyone is saying Lamar will be insulted by this tag and will not play under it.

The other tag is the Non-Exclusive Tag. The cost is $32.4 million per year. However, Lamar would be able to negotiate w/other teams. Baltimore's compensation would be two 1st round picks. They would also have the option of matching the contract offer of other teams.

I think the Non-Exclusive tag is the way they go. I did not think that initially. However, that's probably the best option for the Rats after all the crap that's been slung around and all of the animosity that has grown out of these negotiations.

In retrospect, the Ravens would have been wise to get this done long ago. They played cheap and now it is almost certainly going to cost them way more money than they would have had to pay or they lose the face of their franchise.

Oof. NY Giants are kind of stuck between a rock and hard place though. Daboll coached the team to the playoffs with Jones and the fans expect a step forward rather than a step back so it is tough to sell starting over with a new QB.

It would be interesting if NYG and BAL swapped Jones and Jackson.

I agree about the Giants situation. I think the real story is what is happening w/the QB salaries. Hurts is probably going to kill it and only God knows what Burrow and Herbert are going to get next year.

It's just my opinion but I think the owners have realized that the cost of the QB is going to rise. I also believe the owners are going to take a stand against the fully guaranteed contract. With rumors swirling that the NYGiants and Baltimore are considering franchising their QB's, are they sending a message? One might think that because Watson received such a deal that all teams will now buckle. I think the Ravens and Giants will stand pat and at a minimum assign the non-exclusive tag to Jackson so he can see if there's a market out there fully guaranteed 5- or 6-year deal. As a player you can demand the deal, but you have to find someone willing to pay it. We might be seeing the owners taking a stand against the fully guaranteed contract and sending a message with Jackson to the QB's with deals approaching the next couple of years. It's no secret the owners were upset with the deal the Browns gave Watson. This may be their attempt to level the playing field starting with Jackson.

j/c:


Big Quarterback Contracts Are Not the Problem. Salary Cap Management Is

Can NFL teams build a roster around an elite quarterback deal? Debunking the biggest cap space misconception.

ANDREW BRANDTFEB 22, 2023

We are entering the time of year in the Business of Football when many who are not conversant in the area veer into this lane. And for full-time nerds like myself, especially those with experience and expertise, it is frustrating—and sometimes amusing—to see misinformation and misplaced authority, which comes up as frequently as in any area with salary cap and player contracts.

Over the years in this space and others, I have tried to calmly and reasonably counter such misinformation. But there is one theory out there that continues to have some traction, one that makes me shake my head every time I see or am asked about it, one that comes even from pundits who have covered the NFL for years. It is this: NFL teams paying market contracts for top quarterbacks either cannot, or have a very hard time trying to build a Super Bowl–contending team. My unequivocal answer to this is: wrong!


I have been on radio programs in places like Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Baltimore and Los Angeles, where new megacontracts are expected for Jalen Hurts, Joe Burrow, Lamar Jackson and Justin Herbert, respectively. The hosts have the same question: Can our team do what it needs to do now having to “pay” their quarterback? My answer is as definitive as it can possibly be: yes!

Let me be even more clear: This idea is a cop-out, a tired excuse and bulls---. (Is that clear enough?)


Let’s examine.

CBA makes cap management simple
In the 30-year history of the NFL salary cap, it has never been easier to manage for several reasons:

1. The gift of rookie contracts

A primary reason for this is that the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) mandates that all drafted players must sign four-year contracts, and they cannot be renegotiated until the player has played at least three seasons in the NFL. This provision alone gives teams a tremendous head start on managing the cap.

NFL team rosters have varying numbers of players on rookie contracts, but my best estimate is between 50% and 65% of NFL rosters are players under their first NFL contract. Let’s say there are 30 such players on a team’s roster, and we’ll say that, conservatively, each player has a cap charge of $1 million. That is a cumulative cap charge of $30 million for more than half the team.


With the NFL team cap set at $224 million for 2023, that estimate would put every NFL team at $195 million in cap space to pay their 20–25 players not on rookie contracts. Paying a quarterback market value should not be a problem.

2. The rollover

And, even better for teams, the cap is not really $224 million. Also per the CBA, teams are now allowed to roll over unused cap space to create each team’s adjusted cap. Every team in the NFL rolled over some unused 2022 cap space into ’23, from the Browns’ rolling over $27.6 million all the way down to the Rams’ rolling over $400,000. The Browns—while paying one of the biggest contracts in NFL history to their quarterback—are working with far more than $224 million, with an adjusted cap of more than $250 million.


Thus, each team is working with more than the advertised $224 million, plus the advantages the rookie pay system has given them. Again, it is not hard to pay the team’s most important player a market contract with all of this cap room.

3. The minimum spend

I have written before about the CBA’s minimum spending requirements for teams. While there are deficiencies I have mentioned, including thresholds that are too low in percentage of spending (89% of cap) and time for calculation (over three years), there are thresholds nonetheless. Teams must spend, and with so many rookie contracts, there are obvious targets for where their spending will be: most obviously the quarterback.

Take a team like the Bears, sitting currently with almost $100 million of available cap space. They have virtually no top-of-market veteran contracts in their roster. Indeed, were their CBA minimum spending requirements judged annually rather than over three years, they would not meet the minimum this year. They will have to spend liberally in the next year (or couple of years) to meet the minimum thresholds; Chicago will, almost by necessity, have to give Justin Fields a megacontract next year, just to pay someone on their roster.


Should teams have to spend on someone, it might as well be their quarterback.

Watch the NFL with fuboTV. Start your free trial today.

Chicago Bears quarterback Justin Fields throws a pass
Justin Fields’s rookie contract with the Bears is a fully guaranteed, four-year deal worth $18.8 million.

Mike Dinovo/USA TODAY Sports

Cap management 101
The most basic thing that people need to understand about the salary cap—in any sport—is that cap and cash are different.

Cap is just accounting. It is not the same as money. Cash is real; it is what teams and agents truly do and should care about.


There are many ways to manage cap. In my decade at the Packers managing their cap, I preferred a “pay as you go” approach: trying to match cash and cap as much as possible. For example, if I were paying a player $10 million in the first year of his contract, I would try to load as close to $10 million in cap as possible. I would also try to stay away from signing bonuses, which are (1) prorated over the life of the contract for cap purposes, and (2) give the player more protection in case of default. (Salary, roster bonuses and workout bonuses are ways to load in cash instead to match cap.) The “pay as you go” strategy works to preserve cap flexibility in the future if, inevitably, contracts do not work out, avoiding future heavy nonroster charges, especially at quarterback.


Cash over cap

In recent years, many teams (including the Packers) have chosen a less-conservative cap-management strategy, with liberal use of signing bonus proration. They are choosing a high “cash over cap” strategy early in the contract, loading significantly more cash than cap and worrying about the cap impact at some later date. Again, to each his own, but it’s important to note for this current discussion.

With the cash over cap strategy, teams are paying quarterbacks up to tens of millions more in cash in the first year of their contracts, allowing for ultimate flexibility now and worrying about the future later.

For example, the Rams extended Matthew Stafford last year with a $60 million signing bonus, prorated over the five years of the extension. Stafford’s cash in 2022, on that bonus alone, was $60 million. Stafford’s cap charge on that bonus in ’22 (and ’23, ’24, ’25 and ’26) was $12 million. In other words, Stafford was $48 million cash over cap in ’22. My sense is all of these upcoming contracts—Hurts, Burrow, Herbert and more—will have significant cash over cap value early on, to preserve ultimate team-building flexibility for the near future. The problem usually comes with other parts of the roster.


The sludge

But paying a star quarterback $40 million is not what gets teams in trouble—what does is all the sludge on their cap beyond the cash that is going out. In the Stafford example, his cap charge now has an additional $12 million on each of the upcoming four years, which would be accelerated onto the Rams’ cap if he retires or is traded or released in that time. And, of course, that is on top of the already-existing proration he had coming into that extension.

If there is a separation between the Packers and Aaron Rodgers this year, the team will incur a cap charge of more than $40 million for Rodgers even while he is no longer there. That will match the cap charge the Falcons had on Matt Ryan this past year while he played for the Colts, and surpass the $34 million cap charge that the Eagles had on Carson Wentz in 2021 while he (also) played for the Colts.


Paying a top quarterback (cash) is not the issue; dealing with the leftover (cap) accounting in the future is much more the problem.

Teams can absolutely have large contracts with their top quarterback and simultaneously keep a contending team around them. It requires some expertise in cap management to deal with the detritus if things don’t work out later on, but as I always say: It doesn’t take a cap guru to push out cap problems for another day; it takes a cap guru to make sure a team doesn’t have to do that at all.

NFL teams have plenty of the two things they need to pay a top quarterback and to build a roster around them: cash and cap.

Every team is presently worth more than $2 billion and receives a check from the league worth $400 million before it even turns the lights on. Teams have plenty of cash. And cap room—even with some squandering on bad contracts—is always available. Again, with a good chunk of NFL rosters full of fixed and reasonable rookie contracts, it has never been easier to pay star players.


Don’t fall for the “you can’t build a contending team by paying a top quarterback” trope. You’re better than that.


https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/02/22/top-quarterback-contracts-salary-cap-misconception-space

As we have seen, even if these QB's refuse to play, sit out and/or have serious character concerns, there will be some teams desperate enough to back up the Brinks truck for them.

Forget the Wonderlic nonsense.

My hope is that Berry is looking deep into these prospects' eyes and weeding out the cheesy ones.

Cheesy ones = boneheads, I guess - the ones that will plague us and cost us too much money for the next 3 years.

Jimmy Johnson stated, don't draft a dumb guy- hit me in head with two by four if I ever do it again...advice to Bill B....I agree. Our LT scored a 9 on test first go around. He hasn't excelled. And looks lost at times. Duh! Oakland/ Russell and Browns/ Manziel come to mind when falling in love to easily is rated. Dumb drafts.

Did I miss something? I'm not sure how this topic came up on this thread? Not being snarky. Just confused.

Thread subject- QB carousel- my point is/was- don't draft a dumb one- I'd hate to detail- "“Zoom Change Right Flop 20 ‘X’ Spot FB Sway”-you can throw a great ball with touch, but can you call, understand, and do right progression under pressure.