• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

Lamar Jackson



Lol. Got ATL falcons Twitter retweeting it.

All these teams and beat reporters coming out within an hour of the tag announcement, saying they’re out feels hella fishy. Collusion for sure.

Owners getting together to give a big middle finger to the NFLPA.
 
Davesta said:


Lol. Got ATL falcons Twitter retweeting it.

All these teams and beat reporters coming out within an hour of the tag announcement, saying they’re out feels hella fishy. Collusion for sure.

Owners getting together to give a big middle finger to the NFLPA.
Click to expand...

Well the NFLPA has certainly earned their whooping for this crusade (if that's what's really happening).
 
rmcjacket23 said:
I asked online. Was told by a couple cap experts that teams that don't currently have a 1st round pick in 2023 can't sign an offer sheet until they either get one, or until after the draft, meaning '24/'25 picks.

Was also told the "floor" for trade comp is two 1sts. Doesn't have to be the ceiling.
Click to expand...
So all this time I thought the non exclusive tag ONLY meant two first rounders if the incumbent team didn't match the offer. That makes much more sense.
 
Dom McRaven said:
So all this time I thought the non exclusive tag ONLY meant two first rounders if the incumbent team didn't match the offer. That makes much more sense.
Click to expand...
Well, realistically, that's what it would likely be.

But what it means is that if Team X comes in with a contract offer, the Ravens can say "hey, we're going to match that offer, unless you add more draft compensation to it". So theoretically, the Ravens could leverage an offer they'd otherwise match (or create the perception they'd match) into more trade compensation.

Honestly its probably moot to me, just because I don't think the Ravens would do that. I think they want to keep Lamar, and I think they're risking that approach on the fact that they don't think Lamar will get a better offer in these circumstances than the one they're giving (or at least not materially better).

One other aspect to note... Lamar has to agree to the offer sheet. My understand is Team X's offer is only relevant if Lamar agrees to accept it. He can decline it, and nothing happens.
 
My buddy works for the Ravens in the equipment department, and he knows EDC’s nephew. He told me that the Ravens latest offer was 3 years, averaging over 51m a year annually, fully guaranteed…. And Lamar turned that down. Take that for what it’s worth.
 
Simba said:
Another one

Click to expand...

I'm conflicted. So it's a little strange (while beneficial for us) that teams are just openly saying nah we good on him. Some allude to the owners colluding which could be a possibility.

Though I must say that I'm not taking any of these owners for their words right after the tag deadline. I hope they all keep the same energy once FA is underway, making it easier for us to solidify an extension that I will continue to speak into existence.
 
Tyler said:
My buddy works for the Ravens in the equipment department, and he knows EDC’s nephew. He told me that the Ravens latest offer was 3 years, averaging over 51m a year annually, fully guaranteed…. And Lamar turned that down. Take that for what it’s worth.
Click to expand...
If true from Lamar's view I'd probably want one more year but get where the franchise is coming from. Fair deal to me.

That said I haven't trusted leaks in the media I'm not trusting poster on boards.
 
rmcjacket23 said:
O without question. They get bent over all the time in negotiations.
Mostly because all their actions are just about players getting paid more, despite them saying its about everything else but that.
Click to expand...
Yeah they speak out publicly about pushing for guaranteed contracts, knowing it’s a non-negotiable issue, then can’t understand why owners don’t bite? Keystone cops. Lol.

The f’n Browns are the real idiots tho. They give a rapist the biggest contract in history, now they are scratching their asses trying to restructure and figure out how they are going to put talent around him.
 
redrum52 said:
If true from Lamar's view I'd probably want one more year but get where the franchise is coming from. Fair deal to me.

That said I haven't trusted leaks in the media I'm not trusting poster on boards.
Click to expand...
Well if true, it actually makes sense, because the longstanding assumption with Lamar is if he doesn't want fully gtd, he wants more than Watson got in total gtd money. So he would want north of $230M.

I've been asking the question all offseason... if Ravens came in at 3 years, $150M, fully gtd, would Lamar accept? I didn't think Ravens wanted to do a deal that short, because its so little cap wiggle room with that short of a structure, and you're basically back at the negotiating table in 18 months.

But I'd be very interested to hear if he would take that or not.
 
SaltyDog said:
Yeah they speak out publicly about pushing for guaranteed contracts, knowing it’s a non-negotiable issue, then can’t understand why owners don’t bite? Keystone cops. Lol.

The f’n Browns are the real idiots tho. They give a rapist the biggest contract in history, now they are scratching their asses trying to restructure and figure out how they are going to put talent around him.
Click to expand...
Actually for me, its totally about agent vs non-agent. Didn't hear any public discussions or complaining from NFLPA about Wilson or Murray not getting fully gtd deals. Guarantee you won't hear any of that from NFLPA about Hurts, Herbert or Burrow, of which all or some are at least as deserving, if not more so.

Its because he doesn't have an agent, and the NFLPA is using him as a pawn to get what they want, which is the official precedent of fully gtd deals beyond 3 years. They know Watson is the outlier right now. They need another.

Guaranteed every agent would be telling DeMaurice Smith to fuck off hard if they were doing this to a player who already had representation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top