top dawg

Russ has had an excellent career with one bad year. I doubt that he's done, but even if he is, he's in his mid-thrities.

We offered him a four year deal worth 156 million dollars. That's really nowhere in the vicinity of what the Browns offered. It was reported that it was all but a done deal when the Browns swooped in at the last moment and gave him a better contract. Again, I don't blame us for balking.

I can respect that.

Would you like me to post what Google says it means? I know what it means. What we were offering for Watson was a lot, but it wasn't some earth shattering contract, plain and simple. It wasn't setting any fianancial precedents. It was simply a big contract. The Browns gave him an unprecedented financial contract that will hamstring them for many many years to come if they made the wrong deal. Three first round picks is a lot for an unproven rookie, particularly one as raw as Lance. It was truly unprecedented. That being said, they made the deal, and they obviously either got lucky, or their scouting department and coaches are smart enough to work around Lance's situation. It appears that "betting the farm" was mitigated by their smart decision-making.

Sure, I get what you're saying. If he's super smart then perhaps the risk of getting hurt will be mitigated, but he's going to get hit (just like Russ has gotten hit plenty). But, remember, Russ really isn't a small guy. He has a certain amount of constitution to him. Don't get me wrong, if we trade up for either, I won't be crying. I'll just deal with it as it comes. You gotta pay to play in some circumstances. If you want to roll with the big dogs, you have to be willing to come off the porch.

Well, it's like I always say: the Devil is in the details. Watson's contract was unprecedented. What made it so was the amount of guaranteed money. The repercussions could last at least four more years, but probably more. I'm not saying that we won't trade up. That's going to depend upon how much they believe in an unproven rookie. But even if we do trade up, we're probably not going to set any precedents in draft compensation for said player.

You're totally discounting how the person is naturally built and their weight. Corral is naturally 20 pounds or more bigger than Young. Baker and even Kyler Murray are shorter QBs, but they're not really small guys. Young is a small guy.

I don't believe that we're going to trade up for Stroud or Young, and I don't believe that they're going to magical be available at nine. There are too many QB-needy teams at the top of the draft. Tepper has basically alluded to the fact that he wants to be more responsible with draft compensation, and doling it out based on all these unproven question marks isn't something that I think we'll have an appetite for.

No we were not. I am absolutely correct. The actual term is to "bet the farm," and that means that you're risking everything.

Are you sure about that? That's not the way I've seen this phrase used. It basically means that you're doing something that may be ill-advised. The correct term us actually "betting the farm," and we all know that that's not necessarily what you should be doing. You can look it up, but to "bet the farm" means to risk everything.

I don't really believe that they did from what I remember. Even still, the garuantees is really what the contract is or isn't about, and I can't blame Tepper and company for balking.

Tje reason Watson is not a Panther is because we refused to trade the farm for him. Cleveland arguably did, but we'll see how i t works out for them. I'm certainly not going to base the success or failure of the contract based on a rusty Watson and six games.

Yes, but you must understand that sending a trade package does not equal to "trading the farm." If you want a proven veteran in any league, you're going to have to pay them, and sometimes that's a lot. That doesn't have to mean that you're laying waste to everything and everyone else. Mahomes' contract was unheard of at one point in time, but as you can see, they're moving right along.

If you're going where I think you're going with this statement, you have to realize that the Panthers didn't "try and trade the farm for Watson," and that's why he's not here.

Both sides are making business decisions at the end of the day. It's their right. But, I can't take people seriously who think that the Ravens are all right and Jackson is all wrong. That's not how life works, and it's not how the NFL works.

Not really. I didn't enter that line of thinking into the discussion. I don't think that it matters. I could care less. If Jackson didn't travel for medical, personal or political reasons doesn't matter to me. We all should be wise enough to analyze both sides of the situation and understand that there's not necessarily a right or wrong, and do this without casting some type of negativity based upon either side.

Lamar Jackson's situation is like anything else. The devil would be in the details. To make grand, sweeping statements, and precluding yourself from this or that based upon what someone else is or isn't doing simply makes little sense. You look at your situation---your pocket book---your personnel---your philosophy---your goals---and you go from there. That goes for Jackson or anyone else.

No. They didn't. They absolutely did not. Teams that win championships don't necessarily have a cookie cutter approach believe it or not. Furthermore, neither Fox or Rivera built anything. They did not have that kind of authority. I prefer someone that thinks outside the box and situationally manages, just like I prefer a coach that situationally coaches. I'd argue that neither Fox or Rivera did that consistently enough (if at all). Hence, they were never my favorite guys.

Go find it then.

Yeah, those were my exact words. I didnt stutter, and you obviously don't understand nuance. Sure, you can learn things from different sources, but you have to make the decisions based on your own situation. That's the away it should be. Period.

Well that's the problem, you "don't believe," but you also don't know. I do know that plane flights affect inflamation and certain injuries in different ways.

That's not what I said. I stand by what I said.

No team owner or manager should be making decisions based on what another team is doing. As a fan, I certainly don't care what they're doing. As far as that goes, I'd be more apt to follow what the Steelers are and aren't doing than the Ravens, but I still believe that every manager should be looking at their own situation--completing their own puzzle.

Not traveling with the team with injury is a normal occurrence due to.medical reasons. Tua was in south Florida yesterday as well. Coaches coach, not the players. This has nothing to do with Jackson's leadership.

Ravens ownership and management is just as guilty, if not more so for the Ravens' predicament in my opinion. They're ultimately the ones pulling the purse strings and the ones that could not seem to get the quality of skill-position players around Jackson that would've allowed the team to move forward while Jackson was on his rookie contract. Now they're going to have to pay one way or another. I mean, sure, last night's game may have come down to a pretty crazy call to QB sneak it from one and a half yards out, but poo happens. They are not going to fire Harbaugh over that. They're just not.