top dawg

No, that's what you do. I offered opinions based on what makes sense and actual human nature. I also actually give an opinion, but I'm open to things going differently. You? You just state some report, and then act like it's your opinion. You wouldn't know human nature if she popped you upside your noggin, so maybe you should just stick to facts which is essentially the fact that someone wrote something that you agree with. There's nothing wrong with that. Just stay out of my lane because I actually enjoy football discussion that is more interesting.

Whatever, Scot. Frame all the bullshit narratives that you want. Bottom line is that we did not sign Carr because the Saints obviously wanted him more than us. Moreover, if we wanted to sign Carr, we would have done it earlier than now. Most of the time, NFL players are going to go with the money. The Saints wanted Carr more, and everyone waited until the Combine and eve of the ending of the franchise period to do anything. Those are the facts, much like I said they were going to be.

I agree that we were interested, and I stated that. The problem is that we were interested enough to pay Carr a relatively big-money, long-term contract. I said that no smart team was going to sign him early, and I stand by that.

Well, we'll see. Few stay 100 percent healthy. The belief is that he could have played through the latest injury, had he been paid...In my opinion, you can't let your franchise QB get away. Injuries are a part of sports, so unless it's something career-ending, just pay your players early in order to get the best value because the salary cap is essentially ever-increasing.

Yeah, we weren't that interested like I was trying to tell you all along.

I personally had forgotten about Cousins. I guess the real difference is the tremendous amount of money that is involved here. The Ravens don't want to further and solidify that new precedent with such an amount of money. They are arguing (and betting) that Watson's contract is an outlier. We'll see who's right. But you're exactly correct: Cousins' deal, though seemingly paltry to Watson's contract, was the first fully guaranteed conteact. It obviously didn't really set a precedent, but I guess they feel that Jackson's contract could, being that it is coming after Watson's, and probably before Burrows', Herbert's, etc.

You routinely post one side and you run with it. If there is anything to the contrary, your modus operandi is to question the veracity of the people whom you want to clown. That's why you stuck to the story about Cam by Nolan Nawrocki. I simply posted a report that states that Jackson's camp never asked for a "fully guaranteed contract." Wanting," "demanding," and "asking" are different words with different meanings. I think that that fact is important considering that there has been no definitive report as to what has actually been asked for. Sorry (not sorry) if that just goads your sensibilities that I would have the nerve to post something to the contrary of what you believe. I like to look at and actually understand opposing views and not just run with a somewhat nebulous narrative that has never definitively been substantiated.

So, words don't matter in Scot's world. Everything is black and white. Got it...again!

Words do matter, and sometimes they matter a lot.

Not really. You just don't like the fact that Stephen A. reported something seemingly at odds with the grain. Notice that he has not recanted a damned thing, and there's a reason why.

By the way, if Jackson becomes available, we will inquire whether anyone likes it or not. Tepper is not the kind to play nice with the other owners either.

Of course the NFLPA wants him to get a fully guaranteed contract. That's like the holy grail for NFL players. The Browns opened Pandora's box, and now most of the owners are tryinng to close it back.I think all their contracts should be guaranteed. So if he did good on him. But words do matter, and it's not like we have seen anything definitive.

"Pretty much" confirming and confirming something without question are not exactly the same thing, at all.

Every NFL player "wants" a fully guaranteed contract, but that doesn't mean that Jackson's camp actually "asked" for or "demanded" one. It has been reported that the Ravens offered him $133 bil fully guaranteed. That's not going to fly, and I don't blame Jackson for getting as much as he can.

That would be a good bet. Jackson arguably deserves a contract akin to Watson's. I believe that someone will likely offer him 230-240 guaranteed also with more years on top that are essentially voidable. But we'll see.

Why not? He has the experience, the career and the degree. So...

He wants to get paid, but the contract doesn't necessarily have to be fully guaranteed. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2023/02/24/baltimore-ravens-lamar-jackson-contract-fully-guaranteed-report

Yes, they are that dumb. Like I advised last week, this is NOT Ozzie Newsome's Ravens. Eric DeCosta has not proved to be on Newsome's level. If they let Jackson get away, they will be screwed. Mark my words.

Yeah, honestly that was discussed here as soon as Duce was signed.

My son is really studying the science of muscle/body building, and he would probably tell you that 10 pounds of lean muscle building in two months is simply unrealistic. Whatever Young's playing weight is is his playing weight. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over it. No one knows what's going to happen with his career, but I will tell you this: if all of these execs and coaches believe in him enough to pick him, I'm going to have faith that he can do the job.

We'll see. 204 is a long cry from 190. It really is, especially if it's muscle.

I don't even see how it's a question, unless you're willing to take the leftovers (whomever is left after one and two). I just don't see that as a viable or even realistic way to build your team, much less negotiate the draft. I kinda feel like that's only for Huddlers who are saying that we should just draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. I'll never agree with that. To me it's a nonsensical take, and a nonsensical, if not highly inefficient and risky approach. I call, "Balderdash!"

Did you not here Fitterer say Young is bigger in person than he expected? Reich was so complimentary of Young that Scot (though incorrectly) said that Reich had only showed interest in Carr and Young. As for not doing poo yesterday, well...that's kind of what happens when you put yourself in position with excellent play---tape! You don't have to do poo because EVERYONE already knows that you have the mental capacity and skill to play the game (because you did it). The ONLY question about Young today, yesterday, the other day, and many days before that, is whether he's too small to last in the NFL. Some obviously believe it to be true, and some obviously don't.

IF we trade up, it has to be to one. Otherwise trading up really makes no sense unless we're doing it during the draft to get our guy. That's my take, and I'm sticking to it.