Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Ravens can’t be this dumb? They’re a smart organization right?

TheBigKat

By TheBigKat,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Billy Goat Rising Star

Billy Goat

Posted
Posted

You'd have to think we'd have some sort of interest. Granted he wants a lot of money but you're giving up less draft capital for what's one of the best QBs in the league, the alternative being giving up more draft capital for what is essentially a gamble. If we're lucky enough to draft a franchise QB we'll be handing out a similar sized contract in 5 years anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Raleigh PF said:

I think the Ravens give Lamar the non-exclusive tag and here's why:

1. The Ravens are up against the cap. Giving LJ the non-exclusive tag means they won't have to cut as many guys from their roster to reach the cap, which they have to do by March 15.

2. Although LJ is then eligible to negotiate with other teams, the Ravens have a right to match the offer.

3. The price for a team wishing to sign LJ is two 1st round picks. That means the Ravens would receive an additional pick this year and next. If they like one of the QBs this year, they could then draft one for a lot less money then LJ would require AND/OR position themselves for a QB option next year.

4. I get the feeling the Ravens don't think LJ is going to take them to the Super Bowl. If that's the case, it makes more sense to get something for him now and not make a long-term commitment to a QB that can't take that final step.

It would be a smart move by the Ravens.

I keep think that there is something to be said for trying to get a stud rookie on a rookie deal for 4 or 5 years, then trade him when his stock is high and he wants a huge deal, and go after the next big rookie, wash, rinse, repeat. Yeah it’s super risky but you could build a monster team around said rookies.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • ForJimmy
      Media touting tonight as The Shedaur Show

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      I think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • kungfoodude
      Coach asked about Coker!!

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • CRA
      Monday practice tweets

      By CRA · Posted

      to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...