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!

     

Breaking: Lamar Jackson is available as Raven's have placed the non-exclusive franchise tag on him.

thunderraiden

By thunderraiden,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Seltzer Veteran

Seltzer

Posted
Posted

My best analysis of this so far would be:

1) To the collusion point- I do think the overwhelming majority of owners do not want to see guaranteed contracts become the norm.  After the Watson deal, they want to put that genie back in the bottle.  I feel certain owners have made that abundantly clear behind the scenes.

2) It seems somewhat certain that Baltimore has privately informed teams that they are not going to lose Jackson (i.e. they will match anything reasonable).

3) Given the first two points above, what is in it for any team to become involved in negotiations with Jackson?  The Ravens are not going to let him go, any proposal by another team is mostly just a waste of time (i.e. the Panthers with Watson & Stafford), and it's only going to hurt the league negotiations with other QB's in the future if teams throw out big-money deals to Lamar.

A team could just say eff it and throw out a deal the Ravens won't match, but they will face the ire of all the other owners along with the very real concern about Jackson's injury history.

Add it all up, and this is where we are at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted (edited)

Conor Orr presents an interesting idea...

Orr's hypothesis is that the Ravens could have used discussion around the Combine to gauge how much of a market there really was for Jackson.

Peter King said he did the same thing and found there wasn't much, or...any.

If the Ravens got the same impression, it would have left them feeling confident that allowing Jackson to negotiate with other teams might educate him into having more... realistic expectations of his contract.

Hell of a theory, to be honest.

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Lobo Grand Master

The Lobo

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Conor Orr presents an interesting idea...

Orr's hypothesis is that the Ravens could have used discussion around the Combine to gauge how much of a market there really was for Jackson.

Peter King said he did the same thing and found there wasn't much, or...any.

If the Ravens got the same impression, it would have left them feeling confident that allowing Jackson to negotiate with other teams might educate him into having more... realistic expectations of his contract.

Hell of a theory, to be honest.

I just don’t understand all the teams wanting DW4 and no one wants Lamar…

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinwithWilly Grand Master

SmokinwithWilly

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Conor Orr presents an interesting idea...

Orr's hypothesis is that the Ravens could have used discussion around the Combine to gauge how much of a market there really was for Jackson.

Peter King said he did the same thing and found there wasn't much, or...any.

If the Ravens got the same impression, it would have left them feeling confident that allowing Jackson to negotiate with other teams might educate him into having more... realistic expectations of his contract.

Hell of a theory, to be honest.

It's pretty safe to say his mom doesn't have the connections to pick up the phone and talk to different people in the organizations to guage interest. Not hiring an agent is going to cost him far more than it saves him. 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, The Lobo said:

I just don’t understand all the teams wanting DW4 and no one wants Lamar…

Said elsewhere Watson's contract likely had an impact on Jackson's, maybe a big one.

It's highly possible that if the Watson contract hadn't happened yet, things might be different. But since it did, and it left a lot of people with bad feelings, here we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Call Me James Veteran

Call Me James

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

Who are some previous guys who had contract disputes that got tagged, and how did it turn out? I know there was a major one some years ago but I can't for the life of me remember who. I want to say a DE/DT/LB or a WR. I sort of recall the same guy got tagged years in a row??

Dak 

suggs

orlando pace

leveon bell off the top of my head.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

Who are some previous guys who had contract disputes that got tagged, and how did it turn out? I know there was a major one some years ago but I can't for the life of me remember who. I want to say a DE/DT/LB or a WR. I sort of recall the same guy got tagged years in a row??

Might be thinking of Walter Jones (Seahawks)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Seltzer said:

My best analysis of this so far would be:

1) To the collusion point- I do think the overwhelming majority of owners do not want to see guaranteed contracts become the norm.  After the Watson deal, they want to put that genie back in the bottle.  I feel certain owners have made that abundantly clear behind the scenes.

2) It seems somewhat certain that Baltimore has privately informed teams that they are not going to lose Jackson (i.e. they will match anything reasonable).

3) Given the first two points above, what is in it for any team to become involved in negotiations with Jackson?  The Ravens are not going to let him go, any proposal by another team is mostly just a waste of time (i.e. the Panthers with Watson & Stafford), and it's only going to hurt the league negotiations with other QB's in the future if teams throw out big-money deals to Lamar.

A team could just say eff it and throw out a deal the Ravens won't match, but they will face the ire of all the other owners along with the very real concern about Jackson's injury history.

Add it all up, and this is where we are at.

If point 2 were true, why even open him up to negotiations to begin with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Lobo Grand Master

The Lobo

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Said elsewhere Watson's contract likely had an impact on Jackson's, maybe a big one.

It's highly possible that if the Watson contract hadn't happened yet, things might be different. But since it did, and it left a lot of people with bad feelings, here we are.

Which is exactly why I think there’s collusion. 

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

    • Joe Bear
      2026 World Cup Thread

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • rebelrouser
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By rebelrouser · Posted

      Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...