NFL News Lamar back in BAL

[PatsFan2]

*Sees notification that someone has quoted my post, gets excited to read some good explanations*

*Sees actual post*

Goddamn PatsFans2, don't do me like that! Lol.

Keeping it brief you know.

 

[crownontherocks]

I think Ravens are going WR to keep Lamar happy Addison - Q Johnson or Flowers.

think they trade for nuke tonight or tomorrow

 

[PancakeBlockPaul]

Calling it first. Injured by week 3. Buyers remorse inevitable.

 

[Real fan 02]

In my opinion it seems to be a combination of the cap raising exponentially higher and higher every year, with projections for even greater growth in future years, plus QB talent becoming worse. There are fewer “great” QBs than there used to be so the good ones (or even just the ones that have a chance to be good) are getting paid handsomely. Supply & demand. There’s a short supply, a huge demand, and even more money every year.

Ross,
We had such a humble superstar that took less for the betterment of the overall team for years. Our franchise is spoiled with that thinking. Those days are long gone.. players today, with Owners making so much in all the different revenue streams in my opinion should be paid. They risk their bodies and as we've seen with Hamlin thier lives. So for a former MVP a sensational athlete and a transcendent talent, the only player in the league DCs admittedly say they can't solve he deserves the contract regardless of what any hater has to say.

 

[Grogan14]

Cowardly Pats management misses yet another chance to climb back to relevance.

BB commitment to mediocrity will continue in 2023-2024

 

[Ross12]

Ross,
We had such a humble superstar that took less for the betterment of the overall team for years. Our franchise is spoiled with that thinking. Those days are long gone.. players today, with Owners making so much in all the different revenue streams in my opinion should be paid. They risk their bodies and as we've seen with Hamlin thier lives. So for a former MVP a sensational athlete and a transcendent talent, the only player in the league DCs admittedly say they can't solve he deserves the contract regardless of what any hater has to say.

Hard to have a firm opinion without all the details yet. However, on simple terms, it's $52M average annual value based on the reported salary and dudes like Daniel Jones are making over $40 million a year, so it's not like it's a gross overpay.

 

[Bill Lee]

Can anyone care to explain football economy to me? QB contracts seem to surge each year with no end in sight. It seems like every time it does, it's billed as a win for players. But then you hear about how backloaded they are, which seems to obfuscate how much in the player's favor it is, alongside the addition of incentive marks, etc.

I guess my questions would be: Has the QB position always vastly exploded in value each year?

Are these contracts really the players getting their way? Or are they getting played?

Is there a moment where this model has blowback and has to reset?

Would really appreciate anyone who would take the time to offer their input. Contracts, from their history, to how they're nuanced, is hard for me to follow.

It's too hard to explain all in one go.

One thing to consider is the 'game behind the game' is that agents want the number to seem as big as possible, because big numbers are what brings in their next client. And media members need to have insider information which mostly comes from agents, because the thing that matters most to them and their careers is to be the first to report insider information. Therefore the mediots do what the agents want them to do, which is to make the number look as big as possible, as opposed to calling out agents for being ******** artists.

Thus we end up with language such as guaranteed vs guarantees (note the 's') vs total value. Guaranteed means actually guaranteed. Guarantees means 'can become a guarantee at some future date but if we cut the player before that date the money disappears'. 'Total value' is just the sum of the dollars in the contract, a lot of which are never going to be paid to the player, because the player will be cut or the contract will be restructured before he sees that money. The restructure typically gives the player more actual money but adds more years to the contract but also pushes more money into the future. It's very rare that a big money contract ends with the player getting all of it. What typically happens is the player is cut or retires with non-guaranteed and/or voidable years on their contract and that ends up being 'value' the player never sees.

Another thing to consider is the cap is based on total league revenue, which almost always increases year to year, except for strange things like the COVID year. Thus the teams can hand out more money to star players each year.

So:

Can anyone care to explain football economy to me? QB contracts seem to surge each year with no end in sight. It seems like every time it does, it's billed as a win for players. But then you hear about how backloaded they are, which seems to obfuscate how much in the player's favor it is, alongside the addition of incentive marks, etc.

Contracts do go up each year. Part of that is that the cap goes up each year since league revenue goes up almost each year. Part of it is that in some cases the team is simply deciding to allocate more money to players they think are elite. It's a win for players, but it's not as big a win as the numbers suggest, since the numbers represent the contract's total value, which is almost never fully paid (Watson being the exception). The numbers are exaggerated because that makes the agents look good which in turn benefits the media.

I guess my questions would be: Has the QB position always vastly exploded in value each year?

I would say increased not exploded, but I didn't find a good source that tracks this with numbers so I can't quantify it.

The thing is, the rising tide raises all boats. It's hard to find good QBs therefore a team spends a lot to keep a good QB. Then the next QB uses that bigger number as a precedent, even if that next guy isn't as good as the last one his agent will argue he's almost as good so deserves almost as much. This is what makes the overall trend go up and up.

Are these contracts really the players getting their way? Or are they getting played?

The players are paid very well, just a lot less than what the headline numbers suggest. Everyone involved except the player has an incentive to make it look like the player is getting more money than he actually gets.

Is there a moment where this model has blowback and has to reset?

If teams dedicate too much money to the 'difference makers' such as QB, edge, WR, CB they can become a 'stars and scrubs' team, one with a small number of well known players with big salaries and not enough money to pay other starters, role players, backups, special teams, etc. IMO that is the main blowback path: they spend too much money on stars and end up sucking overall. One can argue this is the Cowboys situation, lots of sizzle, no bacon.

Otherwise, IMO if league revenue keeps going up and up and teams decide 'difference makers' are worth a bigger chuck of the pie, it'll keep going on ad infinitum.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Cowardly Pats management misses yet another chance to climb back to relevance.

BB commitment to mediocrity will continue in 2023-2024

Pats mgt. says you're welcome. I mean, unless you really had your heart set on those 2300 passing yards LJ can bring you.

 

[patfanken]

If teams dedicate too much money to the 'difference makers' such as QB, edge, WR, CB they can become a 'stars and scrubs' team, one with a small number of well known players with big salaries and not enough money to pay other starters, role players, backups, special teams, etc. IMO that is the main blowback path: they spend too much money on stars and end up sucking overall. One can argue this is the Cowboys situation, lots of sizzle, no bacon.

Otherwise, IMO if league revenue keeps going up and up and teams decide 'difference makers' are worth a bigger chuck of the pie, it'll keep going on ad infinitum.

To a lesser degree, we had a similar situation here in the mid to late 90's after the superbowl appearance. My most observers, the Pats had one of the best rosters in the league, but it was also a team that was paying top money to their stars which led to a team that couldn't survive the attrition that comes from a long NFL season. Injuries pretty much sabotaged those teams, (along with some REALLY bad drafting)

The stars got their money and the fans got mediocrity and "if only's"

That is why I think we will never see a run like the Pats have had. Even as the cap grows, it is really tough to build a team that has the quality depth to survive the 17 game season. In order to do that you have to play the cap going forward game, and even though you can put things off 2 or 3 years, the bill EVENTUALLY comes do and the the roster has to rebuild (see the Rams)

You also have to have a run of good drafts, which is the only source of "cheap labor" the NFL has. That "cheap labor" is usually what provides that depth. And as we know, EVERY team has bad drafts every now and then.

 

[Tunescribe]

Too much money. What's he going to do with all of it? Spend it? Waste it? No one deserves that kind of dough for playing a game.

When I'm in charge things are going to change.

What an incredibly eloquent exercise in erudition.

 

[Brotherblues]

I think Ravens are going WR to keep Lamar happy Addison - Q Johnson or Flowers.

They already paid him, he's already happily locked up for 5 years. They're free to build their team thinking in terms of wins instead of his happiness.

 

[Guts]

If he helps deliver a championship its worth it

 

[Since1960]

Who gave you that hunch? Stop the presses Ian.

Other than to handicap him with a new wide receiver - Messr Nelson Agholor.

 

[BennyBledsoe]

I have no problem with him getting paid.

But it's a team sport with a salary cap. You can't say you're about the team if you're getting such a significant percent of the salary cap.

 

[Bill Lee]

Note the use of 'guarantees'...

If his play drops off for any reason other than a clear-cut injury situation, he won't be seeing $185M.

Yet Watson will be seeing every penny of $230M.

 

[Jim Beankie]

I feel like it was only yesterday (10yrs ago) that Flacco got what I thought was a ridiculously overpaid deal (6yrs/120mil), and yet here we are. At least he had won a SB. LJ hasn't even reached a Conf Champ game.

 

[Bill Lee]

 

[TinhWoodhead]

makes mahomes contract look like a better value

 

[Bill Lee]

Colluded, for the exact reason Andrew suggests, they wanted the Watson contract to become an outlier, and not a precedent.

Why am I so sure? No team even TALKED to Jacskon. Not one. NFL put the total kibosh on it. There's no other plausible explanation.

 

[Real fan 02]

Hard to have a firm opinion without all the details yet. However, on simple terms, it's $52M average annual value based on the reported salary and dudes like Daniel Jones are making over $40 million a year, so it's not like it's a gross overpay.

Agreed!!!! Anyone that opposes this as you perfectly stated just look at Daniel jones.. the QB contracts of this caliber actually started with dak, and then went on from there. I believe dak was the highest paid QB until Allen right? So for a good qb or a decent QB that has a good season will command this.