MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK

Question for you contract guys - Should Lamar ask for more than or deserve more than Murray and Watson, like 46.2M/yr or more?

 

You just watched the power that a QB has with your very own team - in what world are you imagining that the Ravens will be able to just defer to the franchise tag for Lamar for any length of time? I mean, how can you honestly make this argument with a straight face?

 

Ño excuses now win the SB.or look like you couldn't get.the job done

 

Honestly, I can’t believe they paid Murray, but the Ravens are much more patient than most teams albeit that was with Ozzie Newsome. The Ravens organization as a whole is much more stable than either the Cardinals or the Browns. They can afford to play hard ball more than 66% of the league can.

edit: Not unlike Kyler Murray, do you think Jackson has proven beyond a doubt he deserves a 5-6 year highly guaranteed contract? I don’t… I think the Ravens can win without him, possibly more than with him.

 

I think the Murray contract screws every team in the league. He’s not good enough for that kind of money so every QB that has played better than him is going to want at least 5-10 million more a season. Cardinals are a special kind of stupid.

 

First: thank you for approaching this honestly. I think it's a worthwhile conversation, so thank you for taking part.

I think we've seen pretty clearly that the only reason an NFL team doesn't pay their QB is either because they don't think that QB is the guy, or because they don't think they can be competitive as a team for a while (which really is a symptom of the first point). I don't think that the Ravens are exempt from that - let's remember that they paid Joe Flacco stupid money, even though you could fairly criticize his play just like you can do for Jackson's play. Sure, he won a Superbowl, but I think that speaks to the fact that NFL teams will pay the QB they think can get them there, even if that QB isn't some flawless star.

Regardless of what you and I think of Jackson, what matters is what the Ravens think of him. Do they think he's a QB they can win a Superbowl with? They've certainly gotten close. If they think he limits them, what's the contingency plan? Because, even if they want someone better than Jackson, if they've got no one to lean on then they're either hoping for a veteran castoff to come in and save them (IE Brady) or they're going full rebuild, and I don't think a smart GM with this team prefers those options.

If they don't think he's the guy, then why have they been very explicit in saying that they're offering him big money? Because they've said that pretty directly, which is highly unusual for a team that's not actually hoping to pay a player for the long term.

The most important part is this: Jackson is never going to play under the franchise tag. He has no reason to. We just watched two QB's walk their way off their teams because of issues aside from money (which I would argue are less important) - Watson demanding a trade from Houston prior to all the nonsense, and Baker breaking up with Cleveland when he felt disrespected. Both players forced their way elsewhere. If Jackson is unhappy because of a franchise tag, he has plenty of options. It is a huge stretch of the imagination to picture him playing under the franchise tag for multiple years, let alone one.

In what situation would Jackson play under the franchise tag, do you think?

 

I don’t think Jackson would even consider playing on a Franchise Tag, because his market value is close to twice that.

 

And there lies the problem with the new NFL. They are starting to let the players run the league, similar to how the NBA has gotten. The NBA product has suffered severely for it. At some point they have to force players to play by the rules or they will go down the same path.

It is pretty simple, if a player decides not to play on the franchise tag, make his ass sit and lose a year of eligibility. If a player is overpaid at $35M per year, sure as hell don’t pay him $46M per year because of his position. These are highly educated people running these teams, yet they have become puppets to the players.

I’m sure you are right, this is more wishful thinking on my part, but the Ravens have proven time and again that they can win with less than perfect QB play BECAUSE of they way they build their team. If they start doing things the way desperate teams do, then the downfall has arrived.

 

Thats a point i was going to make. In my opinion, its not so much the players running the NFL as it is the owners allowing/influencing and down-right condoning and supporting this crazy contracts. On the other hand, I think they can afford it as the NFL took in multple-billions year after year... so can you blame the player, who is ultimately run by a money grabbing agent, to go for the sky in contract negotiations?

At the moment these contracts as ridiculous as the are, seem sustainable, but if its not addressed now or capped, it very well could be the demise of the NFL, in my opinion.

Bottom line - its a dog eat dog, take what you can get situation for now, but it looks bleak for the future at this rate.

 

Not surprised at the size of the contracts but I am surprised at the amount of guaranteed money that is being dropped.

 

So everyone thinks Ben Roethlisberger was worth 46.1 million last season? Because Murray’s average season is about the equivalent of Bens last season. Wow maybe that puts it in better perspective. Murray equals a retiring Big Ben. WTF?
We just ran that out of the league and now another team is guaranteeing that 160 million.

Ben had 3,700 yards with 22 TD and 10 Int
Murray hasn’t had a season with stats that are any better than that in 3 seasons.

I challenge you guys to look it up and see for yourselves.

 

I repeat Murray is way overpriced. Jackson is going to ask for 60 million a season fully guaranteed.

Murrays best season is 3,700 yards 27 TD and 10 Int.

 

I don't see any scenario where he accepts less than Kyler Murray. And that makes me very happy.

 

The players aren't stupid either. They have just as good of an understanding of the NFL revenue stream as do the owners. They know that the salary cap is driven by TV revenue. They know that, for any given season, the team with the #1 overall draft pick gets the same amount of money from the league as the team that won the prior season's Super Bowl.

So, how then did the QB become the position that demands the highest salary cap value? I blame us - the fans. Prior to the 1960's, running backs were typically the highest paid players. Then along came Daryl "the Mad Bomber" Lamonica, "Broadway" Joe Namath, "Lenny the Cool" Dawson, Babe Parilli and John Hadl. What do all these guys have in common? They all played in the upstart AFL in the 1960's. The AFL differentiated themselves from the NFL by playing a much more wide open game. As a result, they received their own TV contract with ABC. The fan interest reflected in viewership resulted in the NFL / AFL merger.

It's no coincidence that the rise in the value of the QB parallels the revenue sharing model initiated by the NFL in the 1960's. TV ratings clearly showed fans tuned in to games with teams that featured the passing game. The media even adopted and hyped the nicknames (presumably) generated by the fans for their team's offensive scheme. ("Run and Shoot" and "Air Coryell" come to mind.)

The NFL and the media are only puppeting what the fans dictated.

 

Who got the first million dollars a season contract. OJ Simpson or Joe Namath?

 

I thought Terry Bradshaw was the NFL's first million dollar per year player.

Many conflicting reports though. I've also read that Bruce Mathews had the first $1M per year base salary....1983

And the late Johnny "Lam" Jones was the first to get a $1M signing bonus...1980

 

Bradshaw only made $470,000 for his last year in 1983.

 

I think you were on the right track, but came to the wrong conclusion. The fans don't change anything on-field like that. The change in rules and offensive philosophy brought about a more innovative and explosive game, which then created a greater spotlight for QB's, which then created a greater demand for personalities, etc. The demand from the fans has absolutely necessitated marketing decisions from the league, but it doesn't change anything on-field. I think the best possible argument would be that the QB protection rules were influenced by fan demand, but I think that's still not a direct correlation.