Ravens score bargain with Boldin

**TL24x7** · 03-16-2010, 09:45 AM

The Ravens clearly scored one with the Anquan Boldin contract. The newest Raven will get $10 million in guaranteed money as part of his four year, $28 million deal.

These contractual parameters match those extended to Antonio Bryant by the Bengals. However Bryant’s deal can eclipse Boldin’s with incentives. Nate Burleson’s 5 year, $25 million deal includes $11 million in guarantees.

For the record, here’s how the 3 receivers' careers compare statistically:

Boldin: Age 29; 586 receptions; 7,520 yards; 12.8 ypc; 44 TD's
Bryant: Age 29; 372 receptions; 5,685 yards; 15.3 ypc; 30 TD's
Burleson: Age 28; 263 receptions; 3,547 yards; 13.5 ypc; 27 TD's

MORE HERE

**psuasskicker** · 03-16-2010, 10:50 AM

You should link MMQB in that post somewhere.

- C -

**TL24x7** · 03-16-2010, 10:55 AM

You should link MMQB in that post somewhere.

**Jeremiah W** · 03-16-2010, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by TL24x7

The Ravens clearly scored one with the Anquan Boldin contract. The newest Raven will get $10 million in guaranteed money as part of his four year, $28 million deal.

These contractual parameters match those extended to Antonio Bryant by the Bengals. However Bryant’s deal can eclipse Boldin’s with incentives. Nate Burleson’s 5 year, $25 million deal includes $11 million in guarantees.

For the record, here’s how the 3 receivers' careers compare statistically:

Boldin: Age 29; 586 receptions; 7,520 yards; 12.8 ypc; 44 TD's
Bryant: Age 29; 372 receptions; 5,685 yards; 15.3 ypc; 30 TD's
Burleson: Age 28; 263 receptions; 3,547 yards; 13.5 ypc; 27 TD's

MORE HERE

I think that is partly because Boldin was tired of playing hardball and just wanted a new deal already, and in part shows the difference between UFA leverage and a guy under contract that wants a new "contract".

Josh Cribbs is/was also a bargain and I do not know if Welker has gotten a raise. Mason is also a great value. Maybe more than Boldin for the next 2 years. He should have more than half the stats of Boldin at less than half the price.

The NFL really does need to get some sort finacial system that makes sense and is a little more fair. Way too much value is put on draft status when undrafted and late round guys become better than #1 picks every year.

**psuasskicker** · 03-16-2010, 11:09 AM

Okay, I'm really, really confused now. I thought you were linking that post as a quote from another article. I feel like I've read this comparison before, but you just posted it today. I swear I was reading this somewhere yesterday, and honestly thought it was MMQB but obviously that's not the case.

Maybe I'm going insane? Having flash-forwards or something? Seriously, I thought you were linking it as a cross-post and just forgot the link...

- C -

**TL24x7** · 03-16-2010, 11:15 AM

Okay, I'm really, really confused now. I thought you were linking that post as a quote from another article. I feel like I've read this comparison before, but you just posted it today. I swear I was reading this somewhere yesterday, and honestly thought it was MMQB but obviously that's not the case.

Maybe I'm going insane? Having flash-forwards or something? Seriously, I thought you were linking it as a cross-post and just forgot the link...

It was also part of my Grapevine from yesterday...

**RavenScallywag** · 03-16-2010, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by Jeremiah W

I think that is partly because Boldin was tired of playing hardball and just wanted a new deal already, and in part shows the difference between UFA leverage and a guy under contract that wants a new "contract".

Josh Cribbs is/was also a bargain and I do not know if Welker has gotten a raise. Mason is also a great value. Maybe more than Boldin for the next 2 years. He should have more than half the stats of Boldin at less than half the price.

The NFL really does need to get some sort finacial system that makes sense and is a little more fair. Way too much value is put on draft status when undrafted and late round guys become better than #1 picks every year.

My argument with Burleson is still that Detroit HAS to overpay to bring in a free agent, because what is your selling point there? Coaching staff won't go very far for offense, no real shot at winning a championship there for at least 2-3 years and that's being generous, very little impact from the city of Detroit, which is also in hard times...The only things you have going for you is playing time and money. Burleson had the playing time everywhere else too...

I think you could use that same argument to a lesser extent with Cincinnatti. They are in MUCH better shape than Detroit...and Antonio Bryant had fewer prospects than Burleson had, since he'd been available for about 4-5 more days than Burleson had been and not very many bites. But other than the great REGULAR SEASON performance this year, what prestige do they have going for them? I think Bryant is a case where Cincy was getting a bit desperate, since we had just reeled in Boldin and they apparently didn't like what they saw of TO. They needed someone opposite Ochocinco, so they upped the ante a bit more to get Bryant to stay.

But yes, this is why I feel so confident defending Ozzie's strategy when it comes to personell moves. People love to jump all over him for not bringing in a guy or not looking at a guy or whatever...It appears all along, Ozzie stuck to his guns, said "We're not going to overpay someone just to have someone here". We've got a lot more going for us as a franchise to where we can wait on the offers a bit, let them make the first move. This season will really be a deciding factor for Ozzie, Harbaugh, and Flacco, but I can't fault any move Ozzie has made in the past two years, apart from L.J. Smith. THAT was a complete whiff.

**Raven Nurse** · 03-16-2010, 03:41 PM

[QUOTE=RavenScallywag;201273]My argument with Burleson is still that Detroit HAS to overpay to bring in a free agent, because what is your selling point there? Coaching staff won't go very far for offense, no real shot at winning a championship there for at least 2-3 years and that's being generous, very little impact from the city of Detroit, which is also in hard times...The only things you have going for you is playing time and money. Burleson had the playing time everywhere else too...QUOTE]

You could sum all of this up by just say......DETROIT = ORIOLES!!!