JoPoy88

Yep. The fact that some people are arguing “well, shoulda took the $133M” is ludicrous.

that’s basically it. Is Jackson probably overvaluing himself? Sure. He’s far from the only one. Not a knock against him. I hit on it earlier in the thread and you just reiterated it - Jackson is in the crosshairs simply because the owners are adamant against reinforcing the precedent set by Cleveland. Doing another deal similar to that completely opens the floodgates as it relates to top-tier QBs. Jackson’s timing couldn’t be worse, in simpler terms. He seems quite willing to stick to his guns however, so good for him.

Eh, doesn’t seem like a complete troll account, but certainly not anything I’d call credible. When you see someone with as many followings as followers, that’s a red flag on twitter. Mean’s they do a lot of “you follow me I’ll follow you” stuff. they appear to be something like that yes. Or they’re closer to Trainwreck sports, which in that case don’t believe a word of it.

And kept Hines.

knowing them, they’ll probably just sign 4 more tight ends.

and yet still posted a respectable ypc.

hynes is gone - they aren’t going to give him $5mil or whatever his number is. I did look at all of them - yes he had 12 TDs of 1-3 yards out.

is that a serious question? Why wouldn’t they be?

as hilarious as this sounds on its face, given that we’re talking about an NFL owner, this ABSOLUTELY tracks and I would be unsurprised if true.

based on pass catching ability alone, he’s a better option than singletary.

well that’s nuts.

how is Love guaranteed to get big money though? If and when they roll him out there and he sucks, they’re not going to pay him just because they drafted him. IF he does well, then sure - you had a season to evaluate him and he looks like a keeper and they pay him. So why not? You’re hung up on this is “elite QB on a rookie deal” thing as a key to success and it’s just not. It’s nice, sure, but not a prerequisite.

All true. And which one costs a lot less? awesome dude.

and Derrick Henry, whom several people here would apparently give up their left gonad for, averaged 4.4. 100% agreed. Great post Alpha.

I agree but don’t some people want him running less? I mean I could look that up. Or you could

I think someone will buck the trend and pull the trigger on Bijan somewhere between picks 15-20

For whatever reason he was a TD machine. Why not.

Other GMs, other teams should absolutely not follow suit. That doesn’t mean Jackson or advocates for Jackson or similarly situated QB’s shouldn’t go for their absolute max value, which, sorry to say it, the Watson deal influences. Again, I don’t care who LJ eventually signs with or for what $$$. I just take pause at broke jagoffs on a message board trying to drag this kid for being “greedy” and save billionaires some money. Y’all ain’t getting a cut of the savings and it doesn’t affect the Bills at all. the market dictates what it dicates - the watson deal is part of that. “but..but..but…Cleveland shouldn’t count because their owners…[insert reasons here].” So what. Have you read what Dan Snyder has done? What Jerral Jones has been accused of? they’re all crooks. But let’s overlook this particular crookery, because I think this guy ain’t worth what he’s asking. Again, bootlickers. All of you.

I can’t “prove” your opinions wrong bud. But if you think, if you actually think that what I bolded above from your post is in any way how that world of multimillion dollar negotiation works, then you don’t know **** sorry. The precedent is most certainly set with Herbert, Burrow, et al. And they will be asking for more than Jackson, more than Watson. All you’re doing is assuming the ownership position. “That Watson contract was BS.” You don’t even consider the retort. These previous deals, they matter. Everything’s a bargaining chip. Every good advocate uses them. And they certainly don’t care if they came from the most ######ed owner in the room.

not at all buddy I’m just a nobody that does his research and knows what he’s talking about. U got anything to add of substance? didn’t think so.

lol I love the nuts on you, claiming that you know better than Beane because why? Breece Hall was good for 7 games? And you “called it”? Honestly the level of delusion is borderline creepy.

lol he won’t. And we’ll note these three you name and see how you did in a couple years.

Because the draft is a crapshoot. Always has been. It ain’t that sinister. Sometimes you luck out and get Tom Brady in the 6th. Sometimes you draft Mike Williams.

that’s not how it works and your ridiculous example doesn’t help your non-argument. I love how so many of you straight up nobodies are carrying water for these billionaire owners and trying to memory hole the Watson contract. Sorry but it happened. And Lamar Jackson, Joe Burrow et al. also know it happened and will continue to negotiate based off it. People far smarter than us are and will be fighting this out going forward because of the Watson deal and y’all taking the side of the other “aggrieved” billionaires because one of their own was stupid, filppant and, dare I say, ballsy enough to break their unspoken precedent. A precedent which has already been broken in the other big 3 professional US sports. Christ. I’d call you bootlickers, but that’d be too kind.

Look if you can’t understand it at this point go read a book. Better yet, go read the NFL bylaws. And I don’t care if x number of fans or x number of NFL GMs recognize the Watson contract as folly. Of course it was. It doesn’t change the fact that it exists and can be (and will be) used as precedent in negotiations between QBs, their agents, and teams going forward. I am not saying teams/owners are actually colluding to keep Jackson’s contract/guaranteed money down. I have no idea. You asked “how is that collusion?” If teams, be their owners, GMs, or both, are speaking to each other and agreeing to not offer Jackson a certain amount of money or guaranteed money, or both, then that’s collusion. It hasn’t been proven. It’s been suggested. That’s how it could be collusion and thus a problem for the league. please learn how to read something without injecting your preconceived notions into everything. he asked how it could be collusion though. It’s not proven, for sure. But given what’s happened to jackson it certainly could be true. I have no opinion either way because how could I? Personally I don’t think the guy you’re responding to knows the definition of the word.