DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum QB Carousel

Not so fast amigo. IMHO, and verified as a possibility on ESPN, the owners in the NFL might be taking a stand to stop the fully guaranteed deal. Jackson will definitely get offers but I don't believe any of the offers will be fully guaranteed. If Jackson accepts any of those deals without the guarantee, the Ravens will match unless it's crazy money like 55M-60M per season. Twitter is already reporting that Atlanta has said they will not be part of the sweepstakes so that's the top money team in need of a QB bailing. The Raiders don't have the money or the type of coach for Jackson.

It's cap cleaning week so that may have a play if some team clears enough cap for Jackson, but I think he might be in for a rude awakening and still wearing purple.

Ditto your comments, I think Jackson gets a wake up- reality, he's not a great passer and he's been hurt TWO seasons in a row. I think their GM did great job- he could easily sign for A LOT LESS money than he was originally offered. Boo Hoo, multi- millionaire. Go Browns!!!

My first thought was "collusion." So, I looked. This took 1 second to find.

Does the Lamar Jackson discussion rise to the level of collusion?

Doug Farrar
March 7, 2023 6:15 pm ET

It is, to say the least, unusual for any NFL team to say publicly that it is uninterested in a potential free agent or tradable player. It is even more unusual (try, this never happens) for multiple teams to make those kinds of statements.

But in the case of Lamar Jackson, who received the non-exclusive franchise tag from the Baltimore Ravens on Tuesday, that appears to be where we are.

The Atlanta Falcons…

The Atlanta Falcons social media team has been told to boost the report they are not in on Lamar Jackson.

Take that as you will 🤷‍♀️ pic.twitter.com/qqpKRHL43R

— PlayerProfiler (@rotounderworld) March 7, 2023

…the Miami Dolphins…

The Miami Dolphins say they are OUT on Lamar Jackson

“Mike fully believes Tua is the perfect fit for his system.” (via @JeffDarlington)

Alrighty then. pic.twitter.com/34Dl6Q08PP

— PlayerProfiler (@rotounderworld) March 7, 2023

…and the Carolina Panthers…

Scott Fitterer certainly will discuss and has discussed Lamar Jackson b/c that's what he does.
But Panthers are not expected to be in the Jackson market, per league sources.

— Joe Person (@josephperson) March 7, 2023

…are among those teams who have come right out and made it clear that they would and will not be negotiating with the Ravens for a trade that would secure Jackson’s services.

It certainly has some other players around the league, current and former, wondering what’s going on.

When is the last time a league MVP was treated so disrespectfully?? I feel some kind of way about it – And don’t tell me what was offered to him, show me!!!

— Tyrann Mathieu (@Mathieu_Era) March 7, 2023

Why are all of these teams so publicly “out” on Lamar Jackson, an MVP winner in his prime at the most important position in the entire NFL?

What am I missing here?

— JJ Watt (@JJWatt) March 7, 2023

Lamar Jackson is a Unanimous MVP, has lead the NFL in Passing Touchdowns, is 26 years old, is 45-16 as a starter and All the QB needy teams are saying they aren’t interested. Don’t smell right to me.

— Robert Griffin III (@RGIII) March 7, 2023

Of course, all NFL teams have the right to deny any interest in Jackson for legitimate reasons. Maybe he’s not the kind of quarterback they want. Maybe the contract he’s going to get after a team gives up two first-round picks to get him on their roster is too rich. That’s all legitimate. And this could all be a smokescreen.

But when you piece together the parts here, it starts to look like at least the edges of what appears to be something in the neighborhood of collusion.

The dictionary definition of collusion is “A secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.” In the matter of the right of any individual to fairly test the free market based on whatever constraints he or she may have, collusion blocks the lanes and makes things patently unfair.

In Jackson’s case, he’s made it clear, per reports, that he would like the same kind of fully guaranteed contract the Browns gave Deshaun Watson after acquiring him via trade from the Texans. The hue and cry from other teams was based far less on Watson’s alleged off-field crimes than it was about the horrifying precedent it set in the minds of 31 other team owners.

Watson’s deal is quite the historical albatross, and it would be so were Watson a five-time MVP with a squeaky-clean history. It is a five-year, $230 million contract, and while the annual cap hits ($54,993 million) are reasonable for a player of Watson’s skill if he still has it, the dead cap numbers are ungodly bad. Were the Browns to release Watson in the 2023 league year, they would take a dead cap charge of $219,972 million. In 2024, that “drops” to $164,979 million, in 2025, it’s still $109,986 million, and only in the last year of the deal does the dead cap match the live cap charge.

No other team owner wants to be put in this position. Now, for this to rise to the level of collision, it would have to be proven that a cabal of owners and executives got together and… well, colluded to ensure that Jackson’s negotiating power would be limited beyond and below the purview of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. This is why collusion is generally difficult to impossible to prove — unless you’ve got texts, e-mails, voicemails, Slack messages, or Twitter DMs in which one owner says to other owners, “Hey, let’s made an example of Lamar Jackson,” what you’re bringing to the table falls behind the burden of proof.

Not everyone has the hubris of a Jon Gruden, who believed himself to be bulletproof to the extent that he could send racist, sexist, and homophobic e-mails to his buddies in the league. That those e-mails became public during multiple investigations of Washington Commanders owner Dan Snyder (another league stalwart who believes himself beyond serios consequences, and he’s been right in that regard for a long time), put Gruden in the vise.

That said, the NFL is far from clean when it comes to collusion. The owners colluded to ban Black players from the league from 1934 through 1946. And there have been multiple instances in which those running various professional football leagues have acted in concert (or have been accused of acting in concert) to artificially limit the earning power of the players who make those leagues go.

Oh, and there’s that whole Colin Kaepernick thing.

When you get this much money involved, and a rule-breaker of a deal like the Deshaun Watson contract happens, it is not outside the realm of possibility that a group of the highest-placed people in the NFL might have a little discussion about it. As has been said, such things are somewhere between difficult and impossible to prove.

But as the Lamar Jackson story pushes forward, we should keep a sharp eye on what is said — and what is not done.

https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/2023/03/07/lamar-jackson-franchise-tag-nfl-free-agency/

If I am remembering correctly, it has to be your own picks. For illustration:
Should we want to make an offer to Lamar, we couldn't because we don't have a 1st round pick.
Even if we traded to get somebody else's 1st round pick, we couldn't offer Lamar a contract.
The only way we could get him would be for us to agree to a trade with Baltimore.

What I would do if I wanted Jackson and I was one of those teams with a top 10 this year is negotiate wiht Lamar but not sign the contract until after this year's draft presuming that with Jackson we wouldn't be drafting that high the next 2 years.

I found it strange as well so many teams have said they're uninterested.... I guess if they have people asking and they are just responding? but seems strange..

only one I get is Miami... I can see them saying no in support of Tua.... of course there are Brady rumors of him going there, so who knows... crazy...

Right about Miami. Also, they don't even have the required compensation to make the trade. They gave up a 1st for T. Hill last year.

Another thing to consider is how many owners have the cash on hand to put it in an escrow account even if they wanted to meet Jackson's contract demands?

Snyder does not.
Davis does not.
Blank and Tepper both balked at Watson guaranteed dollar amount demands. Doing the same at Jackson's contract demands?

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article269018672.html

It will be really interesting to see the contracts Herbert and even more so, Burrow, sign when the time arrives.

We'll see real fast if the league values Lamar more than DW. Lamar has to be thinking DW-style auction Baby! You know he and his mom are going to get him paid somehow.

Posted before seeing all the collusion posts. Hmmm. I don't recall this many teams ever saying they are out as soon as the news breaks. You know damn well it's due to the Watson deal. No ifs ands or buts about it.

I think the issue we have no knowledge of is what the other teams were offering for Watson. I can almost guarantee you that the other teams were not offering the fully guaranteed contract to Watson. You would have to be pretty naive to believe they did considering the backlash the Browns received for giving Watson that deal. Fast forward to today where in reverse, it's reported that Jackson is demanding a fully guaranteed deal. Some may say it's collusion but as detailed above - almost impossible to prove. The NFL is the greatest game around because of the rules that they have. The NFL owners don't want nothing to do with dealing with contracts like the NBA or MLB. Once they let Jackson in with a fully guaranteed deal the doors will swing open for all positions. No QB before or since up to now has received a fully guaranteed contract like Watson received. There's no sense in even talking with Jackson if his starting point is a fully guaranteed contract. That's why all the teams are expressing no interest and the message will be loud and clear I believe. JMHO, Jackson will be back with the Ravens on a big deal after he sees he has overpriced his market value.

That's about where I'm at.

Watching the whole "collusion!" narrative is rather humorous.

First, it's unprovable.

Second, it's basically saying Lamar deserves a fully guaranteed contract just because Watson got one.

Third, the NFLPA made it's bed when they filed a collusion grievance months ago... based on contracts that were signed last season. Citing that there was collusion because Russ Wilson and Aaron Donald weren't granted guaranteed contracts. Setting the narrative for a media frenzy, as if that will make the guys writing the checks bend over and "take one for the team". 🤣

So what, they should be standing in line now to pony up 230+ so people don't think they're corrupt?

Nice post! The owners are obviously taking a stand to fix the mess started in Cleveland. Like the article by Doug Farrar on March 7, 2023 6:15 pm ET stated above:

Watson’s deal is quite the historical albatross, and it would be so were Watson a five-time MVP with a squeaky-clean history. It is a five-year, $230 million contract, and while the annual cap hits ($54,993 million) are reasonable for a player of Watson’s skill if he still has it, the dead cap numbers are ungodly bad. Were the Browns to release Watson in the 2023 league year, they would take a dead cap charge of $219,972 million. In 2024, that “drops” to $164,979 million, in 2025, it’s still $109,986 million, and only in the last year of the deal does the dead cap match the live cap charge.

No other team owner wants to be put in this position. Now, for this to rise to the level of collision, it would have to be proven that a cabal of owners and executives got together and… well, colluded to ensure that Jackson’s negotiating power would be limited beyond and below the purview of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. This is why collusion is generally difficult to impossible to prove — unless you’ve got texts, e-mails, voicemails, Slack messages, or Twitter DMs in which one owner says to other owners, “Hey, let’s made an example of Lamar Jackson,” what you’re bringing to the table falls behind the burden of proof.

That's the whole thing. I see both sides. And I'm wondering how much the "STAR QBs" can command before they get the Kaepernick treatment. I could see Lamar and his mom getting scared and taking the deal, but these other guys aren't necessarily in the same boat. If I'm Burrow, I want mine guaranteed.

This. There is not a world where a QB injured two years in a row and has surpassed 3,000 passing yards once in his career was going to get a Watson-like contract that was already a complete outlier.

Jackson's aim should be to get more 'guaranteed at signing' than Russel Wilson. If he had an agent, he would likely advise him of this. The contract the Ravens offered Jackson was $133M guaranteed at signing. This would have put him at the second highest guaranteed money regardless of possible career ending injury in the NFL behind Watson. Wilson had $124M guaranteed at signing.

In one sense, he's seemingly making foolish financial decisions, on the other, he's making one hell of a bet on himself and his health. I can respect him banking on himself.

As I said a while ago: Lamar was in the driver's seat. It's just that he didn't have control of the wheel, the gas pedal, or the brakes. He may come out smelling like a rose, but he may not. And I can't feel sorry for anyone that is looking at some $30 million plus contract for one year.

Lamar will be out of the league in 3-5 years and everyone knows it.

His knees and ankles are getting the OBJ special in the last 2 years and ended up on IR.

Oct 30, 2015 Non-NFL Pedal Ankle Sprain/Pull Unspecified Grade 1 Jackson missed 1 game with an ankle injury as a freshman at Louisville.
Oct 7, 2020 NFL Knee Patella Sprain Jackson missed Ravens' practice ahead of the Week 5 game vs. the Bengals due to a knee injury. He was cleared to play that game
Jan 16, 2021 NFL Head Cranial Concussion Grade 1 Jackson suffered a concussion on the last play of the third quarter during the divisional-round playoff game at Buffalo.
Sep 29, 2021 NFL Back Lower Lumbar Sprain/Pull Unspecified Grade 1 Jackson managed to play in Week 4 against the Broncos, despite not practicing with a back injury.
Dec 12, 2021 NFL Pedal Ankle Sprain Grade 2 Jackson suffered an ankle sprain in Week 14's loss to the Browns. He missed the rest of the season
Dec 4, 2022 NFL Knee PCL Sprain Grade 2 Jackson missed the final 6 games, including the Wild Card matchup with Cincinnati.


Availability is the best Ability.

That's not the part of the conversation this refers too. No one knows what the other teams were offering as compensation. Considering how quickly Watson went from a "no" to the Browns to a "yes," one could assume that the only fully guaranteed deal presented was from the Browns. When you're paying a 100M more in guaranteed money than any other team is for an individual player you have accepted an unnecessary risk and an act of desperation. Upgrading the QB position was a good move by the Browns. On paper it looks like the Browns will be a better team with Watson. Now we need to see that actually transpire on the field. However, saying all that doesn't mean the Browns made a good deal because they didn't. Watson may be considered elite but he's not a 100M more elite than the other elite QB's in the NFL.

If the consensus is that Watson is twice as good as any other elite QB then shouldn't the expectations be that he performs twice as good? That's why I'm so disappointed in his performance this year. The Browns paid him 46M in guaranteed money for that product he delivered on the field. The Browns didn't get their money's worth and I as a fan was cheated for what he was paid and showed on the field. If you want the historically top money, then I as a fan should expect nothing less than a top elite performance every time he steps on the field for that cost. I have not seen that performance yet.

I'm with you and Milk. I'm not buying the Jackson collusion yet. I get he wants a Watson-like contract in the form of guaranteed dollars but I don't think the there is any consistent proof of collusion. The minute an owner wants a QB long-term, and feels it's not that risk adverse , they will fork over the money. With Jackson, I think the initial concerns about his game are coming to fruition and growing louder. He has only thrown over 3000 yards in one season out of five so far, injured the past two seasons because of main asset (legs), and hasn't elevated his rec. corp. at all. I guess the last point could be a debate as to whether it's his fault or the lack of talent (outside M. Andrews).

I also think there could be some Joe Flacco syndrome going on with giving a large deal to a QB. I do think Baltimore wants Jackson to come back, but I understand the concerns.

And at least one wanted to be able to match/counter offer the guaranteed money.

Except that no one knows who that team was and was only speculation in the press. Saying a team would have or wanted to is not the same as actually doing it. If you lose out on the sweepstakes, what do you expect a losing team is to say? Plus, I find it difficult to believe that if there was another team actually willing to match or counteroffer with a sweeter deal that Watson wouldn't have listened. No one could sell me on the fact that a better deal was out there, and Watson ignored/rejected it.

I am curious why some people oppose guaranteed money so vigorously? Contracts are guaranteed in the NBA, MLB, and the NHL. From the player's perspective, what good is a large contract where a lot of the money is back-loaded?

The NFL makes a ton of money. People tune in to watch the players play. They don't care about the owners. Other than this board, people don't come together to talk about the salary cap. People watch and talk about football because of the players. Yet, folks want to throw their support towards a group of owners that continually proven to be overly greedy, discriminatory, and amoral characters.

I respectfully disagree with your opinion. The players are but a moment in time. Great players come and go but the game continues. Approximately 30% of every NFL roster turns over every year. The player will never be bigger than the game. Luck replaced Manning, Rodgers replaced Farve, Brady replaced Bledsoe, Young replaced Montana, and Kosar replaced Sipe. The fans still come to the games and the TV deals continue to rise. Even more so, it looks like Love will be replacing Rodgers, but you know what - the Packers will still be playing in 2023 and the stadium will be full.

So, I disagree with you because if for example, Watson drops dead today, the Browns will still field a team, the stadium will be full, and a new star will arise sooner than later. Fans support teams and the current players but the players are always changing - the teams do not. It's not support thrown toward owners as much as the players are not bigger than the game. The day that happens is the day the NFL collapses from the #1 sports business entity it is.

I don't think people are opposing players' well-being in favor of the wishes of unscrupulous owners. I think we're, more or less, comparing one contract that is waay overpriced (Watson) with another player's, and his union's, demands. Nobody deserves something just because someone else got it. As much as many want the world to work this way, it's simply never going to come to pass. Watson got a guaranteed contract because the stars aligned with a team that was in total desperation after their QB gave them the bird... in the perfect storm of a bidding war. I don't think this is a mystery, everyone watched it happen.

However, the NFLPA is using this as some outrageous impetus for "fully guaranteed contracts for all". And thus, will use Lamar as the poster child for "see, no fair!!".

There are reasons why this is hard to expect or accomplish...

Injuries in the NFL happen at ten times the pace of every other sport (yes, including Hockey).

The shortest season of all the other sports is 81 games, which usually means plenty of time for a team to recover from players' injuries... The most mundane of injuries in the NFL commonly cause players to miss 15-25% of his team's games. And the amount of devastating injuries is off the charts by comparison. Hell, anyone considering Lamar right now is addressing injury history at the very top of the conversation.

The league has to (and will) change the rules regarding "escrow" before this can come to pass. Only a few owners can pony-up 250M and lock it in a bank account. This is the reason the rest of the owners are mad at Haslam. It is an unfair advantage and creates an unlevel playing field. What is the total obligation to players on our roster? Close to 1B? I bet that's not far off. I bet that number would eliminate 75% of the owners in the league. That kind of liquidity is pretty uncommon.

And then... the league would have to offer some kind of salary cap insurance to owners so that they can spend above the cap when losing players to catastrophic injuries or reaching a certain threshold in regard to total injuries. So that they don't have to stare down the barrel of an ACL and wonder how they will replace a Cadillac with a beat-up Pinto.


jmo, and I'm not for or against guarantees on contracts. I just think we have a dude and his mom parading around like "what about Deshaun?" And it seems more like a cartoon than reality TV... for a bunch of reasons.

One last thing on my mind that no one seems to be talking about.

I've said over and over the last 2+ years that it seemed that Baltimore was going to "chew him up, spit him out, see what's left at the end". That's exactly what we just watched. By doing that, they brought out the best in Lamar as a dynamic player... but not exactly an elite QB.

All that abuse, running (at minimum) ten times per game? That was fine at 15M per year... can the next team afford that approach at 55M?? Or will they now see themself trying to fit a square peg into a round hole?

I think a lot of the alleged lack of interest in Lamar is that the legal tampering period isn't until the 13th with Free Agency officially starting the 15th.

Why not make a 4-5 year yearly guarantee, with a 50% buyout if released before the end.

IE: 30 mil/yr for 5 years, released after the 2nd year, to the player would be guarantee 30mx2 + 15m

Or something like that, so you're not locked into years if the player is a bust, but the player gets something if released, and can go elsewhere.

I get there are "reasons" for not guaranteeing contracts, but I think it's delusional to think that NFL owners are not manipulative and exploitive. I also don't think Lamar's mom is all that involved anymore w/the negotiations.

I am not even declaring that this is collusion, but it was my first thought. And I simply typed in "NFL collusion" and the hits were immediate and numerous. Also, I believe that it only took the Falcons 16 minutes to say they were not interested. I do agree w/your earlier claim that you can't prove there is collusion. On the other hand, that makes it easier to get away with. I think that there is no doubt that the NFL owners have refused to give guaranteed contracts going all the way back to the 60s and 70s. They will fight this tooth and nail.

With that said, I do think that teams are reluctant to do Baltimore's contract for them. I also think that it's early in the process. Free agency has not even started yet. But, think about this for just a minute. Washington's QB is Josh Howell and Atlanta's is Desmond Ridder. And they have absolutely no interested in Lamar at all? LOL

Good point. I should have added that to my last post.

I'm curious what the Commanders' free agency will look like. With Snyder potentially on the outs, where's the money coming from? I wonder if we could see movement on the team's potential sale with FA as a de facto deadline to spur action.