Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, FrenchConnection said:

I think its bad for Lamar because the QB market was just reset again, and the full-guaranteed contract that Deshawn Watson got has been shown to be an aberration, not the new norm like Lamar has been arguing.

It doesn’t get Lamar get a 100% guaranteed 5 year deal, but it still helps him. The line in the sand drawn by teams has been guaranteeing money beyond 3 seasons. Fully guaranteed 3 year Cousins deal? No problem. 3 of 5 (or 4) years guaranteed? Common practice. Hurts just got 70% of his money guaranteed on 5 new years. If you do the math, that’s 3.5 years of money fully guaranteed.

 

Lamar’s problem is that he wants to be the guy who changes things and resets the market for guaranteed contracts. That is unlikely to be how things will change in the NFL. It’ll happen incrementally. Lamar would be better served fighting for a 5 year deal with 70-80% guaranteed now that we’ve seen Hurts move the needle. 

 

Just to clarify my position on the issue: The CBA and salary cap floor guarantees that as a group players get their share of revenue. I don’t think it helps the game to see a lot of fully guaranteed 5 year contracts. That said, I see why players want them. Beyond the guaranteed income, football is a much more violent sport than baseball and basketball - where fully guaranteed contracts are standard. I also see why an owner wouldn’t want to hand them out unless they were trying to entice a high end QB to play for them (see Browns/Watson).

 

IMO QBs are so valuable that they will get fully guaranteed 5 year deals at some point. The owners will be best served to limit them to the truly elite QBs though. IMO they’ve relied on preceding contracts too much when negotiating new ones. Maybe guarantees will be the differentiator in the future. 

 

Edit: Contract details coming in. Hurts might not have the full guarantees initially reported. 

Edited by BarleyNY
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 2
Posted
3 hours ago, chongli said:

 

So, Josh gets less than Mahomes...ok...arguably Mahomes is better, but Kyler Murray, who signed later, makes more than both. Ok.

Don't even try to figure it out , Daniel Jones doesn't even belong on the list. 

  • Agree 2
Posted
4 hours ago, wppete said:


Yup Lamar is screwed. Should be entertaining to see how the Lamar drama plays out. 

I guess the Eagles think more highly of their QB

4 hours ago, FrenchConnection said:

I think its bad for Lamar because the QB market was just reset again, and the full-guaranteed contract that Deshawn Watson got has been shown to be an aberration, not the new norm like Lamar has been arguing.

Just wait for Joe Burrow/Justin Herbert 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Fair question. His model is to build from the trenches out. Which is really effective when you have a cheap QB and can plough that money back into your offensive and defensive front. But when you start paying your QB the big bucks that is where your depth and quality is going to suffer first. That said, last time I think the main issue was just that he chose to pay a QB that sucked. Hurts doesn't suck. So let's see how it goes. 

 

He doesn't suck but by golly he has had Fort Knox on legs for an O-line.

 

Could you imagine if Josh had that line protecting him? Sigh...

Edited by SydneyBillsFan
Posted
3 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

Lamar has been nothing but greedy anyway. He has to realize the Browns being idiots dooesn't apply to him and he is not gonna get a fully guaranteed deal

I think y'all call it CAPITALISM 😎

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, SydneyBillsFan said:

 

He doesn't suck but by golly he has had Fort Knox on legs for an O-line.

 

Could you imagine if Josh had that line protecting him? Sigh...

 

He'd still be Carson Wentz +1000

Posted

So what does this do to the white quarterback privilege narrative being espoused by all the Lamar lovers on ESPN and NBC Sports? Bet it will be conveniently ignored.
 

I like Lamar, but he should have taken the last reported deal the Ravens offered. 

Posted
56 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:

I think y'all call it CAPITALISM 😎

 

100%, just remember in capitalism you have to have a buyer at your price for your product to make it legitimate. 

 

If no buyers exist at your asking price you have to adjust your market. Making max profit doesn't always mean you get what you thought you could. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:

 

Josh didn't give the Bills a "hometown discount" in the amount of money he is being paid.  Where he did cut the Bills some slack was in the length of his contract.  Josh signed a six year contract that began at the end of his rookie contract locking him up until 2028.   With Hurts new contract, he is also locked up through 2028.  

 

Josh entered the League two years before Hurts did and both of their second contracts end in 2028.  The Bills got to lock up their guy at a lower rate for an additional two years compared to the Eagles, and with the inflation of the QB market, those extra years are big.  The Chiefs robbed the bank getting Mahomes to sign for ten years.

 

In today's NFL, I think the length of the contract is more important than the amount of the contract.  Every additional year is incredibly valuable to a franchise.

Very good point.  Especially for QBs

Posted
6 hours ago, HOUSE said:

The cap for QBs needs to be set at 1 billion per season  to prevent future craziness 

You monster .. how will they be able to support their families. It is always about supporting ones family and no human should be expected to do it for less than a mere $40 million per year.

Posted
6 hours ago, RiotAct said:

he should dress like Scrooge McDuck at his next press conference

 

Didn’t Cam Newton trademark that? 

Posted
5 hours ago, nucci said:

you don't think his contract will be adjusted before 2028?

 

First, you posted that Josh would want to "redo" his contract in 2 years.  He is in the 1st year of his 6-year contract in 2023.

 

If all goes well Josh will be "extending" his contract most likely in spring of 2027.  BUT, when he does it will not negate the contract he is already

signed for.  I would guess with the way things are going his extension will be in the high 60's range.  IF Josh Allen is moaning and groaning 

for more money in 2 years, it will most likely mean he would want out of Buffalo.  I don't see that happening.

Posted

We will see more and more Quarterbacks asking for an updated deal reflecting resent signings.

I expect a few hold outs and players begging for trades.

It won't be pretty....

It all started with Bruce Smith, he truly believed it should be automatic,  some player makes more then he gets more too.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

We will see more and more Quarterbacks asking for an updated deal reflecting resent signings.

I expect a few hold outs and players begging for trades.

It won't be pretty....

It all started with Bruce Smith, he truly believed it should be automatic,  some player makes more then he gets more too.

 

That is a distinct possibility.  I don't think Josh will be one of them.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Just for amusement's sake, consider:

 

The Marriott in Amherst, a 400 room hotel in good condition and prime location, just sold for 14 million.

 

That's less than a year's salary for these QBs. It's just crazy.

 

And McKinley Mall will go for peanuts next month.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

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.   Restore formatting

  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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...