NFL News OT: Sources: Seahawks' Jaxon Smith-Njigba agrees to record extension

[Vindicate]

There needs to be a cap on new contracts or the NFL vetoing deals when mediocre players explode the market. For instance, was Drew Bledsoe getting the highest contract in NFL history warranted? Absolutely not and that contract was pretty controversial. He was on the decline in terms of play the last two years and his teams were on a steady decline since 1997. Michael Vick later becoming the highest paid in the NFL was highly controversial and not warranted as well.

Later on you guys like Tua and the midget in Arizona making more than Patrick Mahomes. Why is Trevor Lawrence the 3rd highest in fully guaranteed money? Why are he and Jordan Love within the top 3 of average annual salary? Somehow, the most accomplished QB in the NFL right now is the 12th highest paid in the league.

This is just one example of what are wrong with NFL contracts. It's an endless cycle that won't stop. So when a team has a good QB on their hands, they will have no choice, but to leapfrog everyone else. If Maye duplicates 2025 1-2 more times, be prepared for him to obliterate the QB market.

On the other hand: Getting better and more consistent at drafting would be a major fix to a lot of things. There can be an ask of front offices to do better, IMO.

 

[XLIX]

If the Pats are the first team to evenly spread the cap hits and never once restructure because they have cap issues, then sure, it can be done. But we've yet to see that happen.

I never said they wouldn't restructure this hypothetical contract. Restructuring it annually - like KC does with Mahomes - is an important tool to keep the number down. Works pretty well for them.

As for Watson, even if he turned into such a great QB for Cleveland that it made Tom Brady jealous, why would that have stopped them from continuously bumping his cap hit forward because they had no money for anyone else?

Yeah. Sure. Cleveland is so broke that they only have the best defensive player in the League on their team.

DeShaun Watson is only 15% of Cleveland's cap number this year. The problem isn't Watson's cap number, the problem is he totally sucks. If he was "such a great QB for Cleveland that it made Tom Brady jealous" then they'd be front runners for the Super Bowl.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

I never said they wouldn't restructure this hypothetical contract. Restructuring it annually - like KC does with Mahomes - is an important tool to keep the number down. Works pretty well for them.

Yeah. Sure. Cleveland is so broke that they only have the best defensive player in the League on their team.

DeShaun Watson is only 15% of Cleveland's cap number this year. The problem isn't Watson's cap number, the problem is he totally sucks. If he was "such a great QB for Cleveland that it made Tom Brady jealous" then they'd be front runners for the Super Bowl.

And Watson still has roughly $85 million on the books AFTER this season when the contract was supposed to end. That's how they could afford Garrett, they kicked the can down the road on a terrible contract.

 

[XLIX]

And Watson still has roughly $85 million on the books AFTER this season when the contract was supposed to end. That's how they could afford Garrett, they kicked the can down the road on a terrible contract.

Cleveland is expecting cap relief due to his injury. It likely won’t be that high.

But if Watson didn’t suck, then you extend him and spread that cap hit out over 5 years (like KC is doing with Mahomes).

I’ll Say it again: Watson’s contract is not the problem. The fact that he sucks royally is the problem.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

Cleveland is expecting cap relief due to his injury. It likely won’t be that high.

But if Watson didn’t suck, then you extend him and spread that cap hit out over 5 years (like KC is doing with Mahomes).

I’ll Say it again: Watson’s contract is not the problem. The fact that he sucks royally is the problem.

So the solution is keep extending a good player until his cap hit is really high when he starts to decline?

Myles Garrett will be 34 with a cap hit of $63 million and 35 when it's $58 million. Keep extending him until his cap hit is $80 million when he's 39?

 

[XLIX]

So the solution is keep extending a good player until his cap hit is really high when he starts to decline?

I am not talking about “really good players” here. I am talking about really good quarterbacks, which is the single most important position in all of sports.

When you have a star QB then it is wise to take full advantage of his window by kicking the salary cap can down the road as much as you can. Yeah you’ll have to eat a **** sandwich the first year he’s gone but it is worth it in exchange for a decade of competing for Super Bowls.

Myles Garrett will be 34 with a cap hit of $63 million and 35 when it's $58 million. Keep extending him until his cap hit is $80 million when he's 39?

The salary cap will probably be over $500 million when Garrett is 39. $80 million won’t be as much in 2035 as it is today.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

I am not talking about “really good players” here. I am talking about really good quarterbacks, which is the single most important position in all of sports.

When you have a star QB then it is wise to take full advantage of his window by kicking the salary cap can down the road as much as you can. Yeah you’ll have to eat a **** sandwich the first year he’s gone but it is worth it in exchange for a decade of competing for Super Bowls.

The salary cap will probably be over $500 million when Garrett is 39. $80 million won’t be as much in 2035 as it is today.

Having "only" 16% of your salary cap in 2035 going to a player that is either retired or not worth a fraction of that is a problem. And I would hope you would call that a terrible contract just like with Watson.

The whole debate is about massive contracts and how they affect team building. There's no way around it, eventually the bill comes due. You can delay it, you can manipulate it, but eventually the accounting catches up. And when that happens, it limits your ability to build the best team possible. That's not fun as a fan.

 

[XLIX]

Having "only" 16% of your salary cap in 2035 going to a player that is either retired or not worth a fraction of that is a problem. And I would hope you would call that a terrible contract just like with Watson.

No I wouldn’t. I’d rather pay $160 million for the best defensive player in the League than $230 million for an atrocious QB. Having some dead money after keeping the best defensive player in the NFL for roughly a decade is not a big deal.

The whole debate is about massive contracts and how they affect team building. There's no way around it, eventually the bill comes due. You can delay it, you can manipulate it, but eventually the accounting catches up. And when that happens, it limits your ability to build the best team possible. That's not fun as a fan.

You can’t field a competitive team every single year from here to infinity. When you have the players, make the most of it. Then having a down year or two afterwards is not the end of the world.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

No I wouldn’t. I’d rather pay $160 million for the best defensive player in the League than $230 million for an atrocious QB. Having some dead money after keeping the best defensive player in the NFL for roughly a decade is not a big deal.

You can’t field a competitive team every single year from here to infinity. When you have the players, make the most of it. Then having a down year or two afterwards is not the end of the world.

I've never seen an example of a fan base that watched their team go all in to try and win a Super Bowl, then didn't care afterwards when they sucked for a couple seasons while getting the cap reset. If the Pats do that and win 5 straight titles before the cap catches up, people will still be pissed we didn't win 6 straight.

Fans always want at least one more.

 

[XLIX]

I've never seen an example of a fan base that watched their team go all in to try and win a Super Bowl, then didn't care afterwards when they sucked for a couple seasons while getting the cap reset.

********. Fans understand the concept of rebuilding years, and that includes when they have to get dead money off the books.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

********. Fans understand the concept of rebuilding years, and that includes when they have to get dead money off the books.

So you personally know Rams fans that weren't bothered at all by going 5-12 the year after winning the Super Bowl?

 

[XLIX]

So you personally know Rams fans that weren't bothered at all by going 5-12 the year after winning the Super Bowl?

You’re moving the goalposts and hoping no one notices. The Rams kept their core team intact after their Super Bowl so it wasn’t supposed to be a rebuilding year.

Nice try, though.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I've never seen an example of a fan base that watched their team go all in to try and win a Super Bowl, then didn't care afterwards when they sucked for a couple seasons while getting the cap reset. If the Pats do that and win 5 straight titles before the cap catches up, people will still be pissed we didn't win 6 straight.

Fans always want at least one more.

So you personally know Rams fans that weren't bothered at all by going 5-12 the year after winning the Super Bowl?

What the Rams did building up to 2021 was absolutely worth it. The last time they won a Super Bowl was in 1999. Going all in was kind of the entire point when they traded for Stafford. I never understood the "not mortgaging the future" logic from fans and NFL execs as if success is later guaranteed. They quickly find out it isn't.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

You’re moving the goalposts and hoping no one notices. The Rams kept their core team intact after their Super Bowl so it wasn’t supposed to be a rebuilding year.

Nice try, though.

I just refuse to believe the Patriots could win a Super Bowl, then purge the roster out of financial necessity, and the majority of fans would shrug and say "Who cares?!! We won last season!!" And you won't be able to provide one example of that ever happening anywhere.

 

[TommyD4207]

I just refuse to believe the Patriots could win a Super Bowl, then purge the roster out of financial necessity, and the majority of fans would shrug and say "Who cares?!! We won last season!!" And you won't be able to provide one example of that ever happening anywhere.

Maybe Patriots fans.
But Rams fans absolutely shrugged their shoulders and said 'who cares'. 2 years later they were good again anyway.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

What the Rams did building up to 2021 was absolutely worth it. The last time they won a Super Bowl was in 1999. Going all in was kind of the entire point when they traded for Stafford. I never understood the "not mortgaging the future" logic from fans and NFL execs as if success is later guaranteed. They quickly find out it isn't.

The Rams situation is unique in that they needed to make a splash after moving to LA to ensure that the franchise reestablish its fan base. I am not sure what will happen when they have to find a new QB.

 

[XLIX]

I just refuse to believe the Patriots could win a Super Bowl, then purge the roster out of financial necessity, and the majority of fans would shrug and say "Who cares?!! We won last season!!" And you won't be able to provide one example of that ever happening anywhere.

Intelligent fans understand that even well run franchises have to have the occasional rebuilding season.

If you don't see this, then you're blind.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

Intelligent fans understand that even well run franchises have to have the occasional rebuilding season.

If you don't see this, then you're blind.

I agree that not all fans would be like that. But I also believe every fan base has more "no excuses" fans than you think.

My point all along is simple: we may understand that even the best run franchises need the occasional rebuilding year, it's simply that I don't like that absurd contracts be the reason for it.

If the core of a team starts to get long in the tooth and it's been a few lean years in the draft, it may suck, but maybe it's time for a reset. That's different. I just don't like that we're starting to see contracts that we know with certainty from the very second they're signed that it will be a severe financial handicap for the team at some point. Yes, it's the new reality, but it doesn't mean I have to like it or not wish there was a solution.

 

[lancerman]

So the solution is keep extending a good player until his cap hit is really high when he starts to decline?

Myles Garrett will be 34 with a cap hit of $63 million and 35 when it's $58 million. Keep extending him until his cap hit is $80 million when he's 39?

The issue is more that they made a big bet that completely failed and they are paying the price. They aren't in a normal situation. It's their own fault they are dealing with this.

 

[lancerman]

I agree that not all fans would be like that. But I also believe every fan base has more "no excuses" fans than you think.

My point all along is simple: we may understand that even the best run franchises need the occasional rebuilding year, it's simply that I don't like that absurd contracts be the reason for it.

If the core of a team starts to get long in the tooth and it's been a few lean years in the draft, it may suck, but maybe it's time for a reset. That's different. I just don't like that we're starting to see contracts that we know with certainty from the very second they're signed that it will be a severe financial handicap for the team at some point. Yes, it's the new reality, but it doesn't mean I have to like it or not wish there was a solution.

Tbf every league with a salary cap will have this dilemma. The contracts are only a problem because a cap exists. The debate is whether you value the parity that a cap provides. If you do, then teams will only be as good as their roster building and drafting abilities and that's the only way to sustain success. If you don't, you better hope your team has one of the richest owners.

The issue for us is that we aren't in the 00's or mid 2010's where we had a QB who played ball with contracts that elevated talent and aren't just hitting on diamonds in the rough that fit the system. Doing that provided a huge advantage. Once those bets stopped working out as frequently, spending became an issue.