Jalen Hurts extended

[rmoneyg35]

I wish they had limits on what players could get paid. If they are going to have caps then why not limits? Also they should make it to where teams resigning players they drafted don’t cost as much against the cap. I would love if they did something to where you could cancel contracts if a player gets hurt or doesn’t play up to expectations and it won’t hurt the cap.

[SCO96]

55 minutes ago, rmoneyg35 said:

I wish they had limits on what players could get paid. If they are going to have caps then why not limits? Also they should make it to where teams resigning players they drafted don’t cost as much against the cap. I would love if they did something to where you could cancel contracts if a player gets hurt or doesn’t play up to expectations and it won’t hurt the cap.

A lot of people would consider the above statment blasphemous...but I understand your point of view.

If you, me , or others on this board were employed by a company and did a poor job we wouldn't shocked if we were dismissed or had our salary reduced b/c of poor performance. If we were injured or sick and placed on disabilty, we may get some money, but defintely not 100% of our usual salary. The idea of a guaranteed salary without any exceptions for inury and/or poor performance is ridiculous in the everyday world you and I live in. In the NFL you receive a salary bonus upfront and guaranteed minumum even though you may not ever come close to living up to the expectations the team had when the deal was signed.

And, to make make matters worse that contract counts against a salary cap that requires you to pay 52 other players. NFL economics have never made any since to me.

[Aussie Tank]

Can we use this to our advantage and go after Tee Higgins. The Bengals are notoriously cheap and won’t want to pay for Burrow, Chase and Higgins 

[Martin]

There could be a cap on how much of the annual cap a single player could use, e.g. no player can make up more than 20% of the cap. That would allow for spreading the money to other positions. Not sure if feasible or not, but maybe.

Also, if Lamar had an agent he would have a contract right now. Unfortunate to see him essentially sabotaging himself.

[SmokinwithWilly]

2 hours ago, SCO96 said:

A lot of people would consider the above statment blasphemous...but I understand your point of view.

If you, me , or others on this board were employed by a company and did a poor job we wouldn't shocked if we were dismissed or had our salary reduced b/c of poor performance. If we were injured or sick and placed on disabilty, we may get some money, but defintely not 100% of our usual salary. The idea of a guaranteed salary without any exceptions for inury and/or poor performance is ridiculous in the everyday world you and I live in. In the NFL you receive a salary bonus upfront and guaranteed minumum even though you may not ever come close to living up to the expectations the team had when the deal was signed.

And, to make make matters worse that contract counts against a salary cap that requires you to pay 52 other players. NFL economics have never made any since to me.

There really should be an out for injury retirement like Luke had. That's not anyone's fault, it's just part of the game. There should be something to at least offset part of that cap hit because you've lost a player to something beyond either party's control. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

4 minutes ago, Martin said:

There could be a cap on how much of the annual cap a single player could use, e.g. no player can make up more than 20% of the cap. That would allow for spreading the money to other positions. Not sure if feasible or not, but maybe.

Also, if Lamar had an agent he would have a contract right now. Unfortunate to see him essentially sabotaging himself.

One way to do it could be to set a limit on the amount of cap space dedicated to a particular area of the team. Say 55% offense, 40% defense and 5% special teams. Teams could still throw whatever number they wanted at a particular player, but they would have to allocate it from that % block. 

[LegioX]

Who remembers the days of teams having to pay a first year #1 pick a ludicrous contract prior to playing 1 snap…

[SmokinwithWilly]

11 minutes ago, LegioX said:

Who remembers the days of teams having to pay a first year #1 pick a ludicrous contract prior to playing 1 snap…

That's what made JaMarcus Russell one of the biggest busts in NFL history. It wasn't just the pick. That was the equivalent to signing Jimmy Pickles to a 70m contract. 

[Shocker]

Holy guacamole 

What a contract 

[carpanfan96]

9 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I doubt this is true.

 

200 mil guaranteed and he still turned it down?

 

 

 

He turned down a 4 year deal with 175 fully guaranteed reportedly earlier this off-season as well.  

 

Plus a non fully guaranteed deal that would have made him the highest paid nfl qb. 

 

Word is he wants 5 years, fully guaranteed and to be the highest paid qb in the same contract.  

[PantherOnTheProwl1523]

28 minutes ago, BriceYung9 said:

This will come back to haunt them. He is not as good as his numbers last year. The Eagles are playing on borrowed time. 

[toldozer]

This is why you have to win while your qb is on a rookie deal. Unless you have one of the top 3 in the game you're better off drafting a quarterback in the first round every 4-5 years

[toldozer]

6 hours ago, carpanfan96 said:

He turned down a 4 year deal with 175 fully guaranteed reportedly earlier this off-season as well.  

 

Plus a non fully guaranteed deal that would have made him the highest paid nfl qb. 

 

Word is he wants 5 years, fully guaranteed and to be the highest paid qb in the same contract.  

Lamar needs to read the room.  He's not coming off looking very good in any of this.  At this point the ravens should draft hooker this year,  make lamar play on the tag then let him walk