Not to mention that with Suggs and Ngata, the Salary Cap was actually HIGHER than it is now - and again, they weren't taking up such a huge percentage of the Cap.
Dude, we're on page 19 of this thread and very few have actually said that. Stop exaggerating. Stop taking it so personally.
In fact, the only person that seems to be continuing to say that is YOU when you refer to others saying it (when there's been very little of it).
“I would say to you, of the other 52 players on the roster, how many of the other 52 [took less money]?” said Linta, who has argued Flacco should be the highest-paid quarterback in the league. “Do you work with [the Ravens] in terms of structure to help them out? Absolutely. But like I said, we all took risks. And I don’t think anybody was gonna feel sorry for Joe if he turned down a contract in July and didn’t have a great year and now was faced with less than what we’re talking about. Look, there’s risk on both sides, and somebody could be saying to the Ravens, ‘Hey, don’t you think it’s worth sacrificing some areas of your team to keep your franchise quarterback?’ There’s arguments on both sides, believe me.”
So the goal, as Linta explained it, is to “be creative with the contract to get what you want and structure so that it helps the Ravens and doesn’t put them in a bad place cap-wise.”
Note, you mentioned several players (Suggs, Ngata, Reed, Lewis, Rice, etc) and referred to when they were signed. I responded about "those guys" and the time that those contracts were signed.Quote:
......where was this line of thinking when it came to Suggs, Ngata, Reed, Lewis, Rice, etc? To me, it's just way too hypocritical to lay it all on Joe, while all this other over spending went on without comment.......
Now, stop trying to move the goalposts.
I was just pointing out that the contracts for NONE of the players that you mentioned were/are anywhere as large as Flacco's and that the Cap was higher at the time that many of those deals were signed. So, there wasn't much/any complaining when those deals were signed (not that many are really complaining now) because their deals weren't of the size of Flacco's and didn't have as huge of an impact on the team's Cap as Flacco's will.
Great piece on National Football Post about the Cap implications of using either of the Franchise Tags:
Because to a non cap expert, it appears as if, heading into 2013, Suggs is taking up $13M, and Ngata is taking up $11.5M. So that's 24.5M. For 2 players, who aren't quarterbacks. Hmmmmmmmmm....
Teams were contemplating a franchise-tag run at Flacco before the postseason