Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 289101112131415 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 221
  1. Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy



    there is no way Ray Rice deserves anywhere near that money. And if the Ravens are smart they won't even pay him Foster money, just franchise him instead of commit to something long term and bloated. There are plenty of good Running backs out there that would love to get those carries and plenty with talent too. i really hope the Ravens don't put themselves in a Titans - Chris Johnson situation where at some point you know you overspent. And every secondary RB we've had has performed more than adequately, and in some cases arguably better than Rice at times. Just no way they should be committing anywhere near this money on a running back, i'd rather see it towards a lineman or even defensive player.




  2. #167
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Where Ravens Fans Roam Free
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    Flacco is getting signed this year. They might pay up to do it too. Both Ozzie and Bisciotti want Flacco to be the starting QB for the long run. The fact that they negotiating and extension a year early means the decision has already been made. Flacco will be signed and Rice better decide if he wants to be tagged again in 2013.
    I want Flacco signed as well, but it would be a mistake to give him a $100+ million contract. As much as I like Flacco and understand that the Ravens need him, Flacco is not the kind of difference maker that warrants such a deal.




  3. #168
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,040
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt1 View Post
    I want Flacco signed as well, but it would be a mistake to give him a $100+ million contract. As much as I like Flacco and understand that the Ravens need him, Flacco is not the kind of difference maker that warrants such a deal.
    Sam Bradford signed a rookie deal that average $13 million a year. Flacco is going to get more than that. $15 million average for 6 years gets you to $90 million. Based on what QBs are being paid he's going to get that. With the way the NFL is structured you really don't have a choice but to overpay.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  4. #169

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt1 View Post
    I want Flacco signed as well, but it would be a mistake to give him a $100+ million contract. As much as I like Flacco and understand that the Ravens need him, Flacco is not the kind of difference maker that warrants such a deal.
    Philip Rivers got 6 years, 92 million in 2009. He was 27 years old at the time, the same age as Flacco is now, and had been a starter 3 full seasons to Flacco's 4. Rivers averaged 3516 yards per season, Flacco averaged 3454. Rivers threw more TDs per season, but also more INTs. Rivers averaged a slightly higher QB rating, but had for the most part played poorly in the playoffs.

    The bottom line is that the two are very closely comparable and adjusting for inflation, I think Flacco's contract could certainly hit 6 or 7 years and right around or under 100 million. I know it sounds scary, but that's the going rate for young, franchise QBs these days. The total contract number is also not anywhere near as relevant as the annual structure and the guaranteed money, anyway.

    Contrast this to Drew Brees, who apparently turned down 20 million a year from the Saints. That's what the super-elite QB contracts are going to start looking like, in which comparison an average yearly number of 14 million (obviously the cap hit will be lower than that) isn't as shocking.




  5. #170

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    Philip Rivers got 6 years, 92 million in 2009. He was 27 years old at the time, the same age as Flacco is now, and had been a starter 3 full seasons to Flacco's 4. Rivers averaged 3516 yards per season, Flacco averaged 3454. Rivers threw more TDs per season, but also more INTs. Rivers averaged a slightly higher QB rating, but had for the most part played poorly in the playoffs.

    The bottom line is that the two are very closely comparable and adjusting for inflation, I think Flacco's contract could certainly hit 6 or 7 years and right around or under 100 million. I know it sounds scary, but that's the going rate for young, franchise QBs these days. The total contract number is also not anywhere near as relevant as the annual structure and the guaranteed money, anyway.

    Contrast this to Drew Brees, who apparently turned down 20 million a year from the Saints. That's what the super-elite QB contracts are going to start looking like, in which comparison an average yearly number of 14 million (obviously the cap hit will be lower than that) isn't as shocking.
    When Rivers signed that contract he was coming off a season where he threw for 4k yards (back when that meant something, ranked him 5th), 65% comp pct, 34 TD (league best, tied)/11 Int and a league-leading (by good amount) QB rating of 105.5. In short, Rivers was the best QB in the league the previous year, statistically.

    I am sorry, but Flacco does not have, nor should he have, anywhere near the bargaining power that Rivers had while he is negotiating his contract. But that doesn't mean he will not get $100M. General inflation plus the QB position itself has seen more money go into it over these years (with Cassel, Kolb, and Flynn type deals for almost total unprovens)




  6. #171

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    When Rivers signed that contract he was coming off a season where he threw for 4k yards (back when that meant something, ranked him 5th), 65% comp pct, 34 TD (league best, tied)/11 Int and a league-leading (by good amount) QB rating of 105.5. In short, Rivers was the best QB in the league the previous year, statistically.

    I am sorry, but Flacco does not have, nor should he have, anywhere near the bargaining power that Rivers had while he is negotiating his contract. But that doesn't mean he will not get $100M. General inflation plus the QB position itself has seen more money go into it over these years (with Cassel, Kolb, and Flynn type deals for almost total unprovens)
    Rivers' final year was certainly better, there's no doubting that, and his leverage was higher, but I don't know about Flacco's leverage being "nowhere near." As I said their body of work was very similar, and teams presumably place more stock into the body of work rather than only the preceding year. I think you're overvaluing the importance of that single year--exactly what Rivers and his negotiators would have liked the Chargers to do. AJ Smith is perhaps the NFL's most iron-fisted negotiator, so I doubt he would have fallen into that trap.

    In any event, I'm not sure how easy it is to quantify and compare the leverage of players, anyway. There's so much more that goes into it than just their stats over the past few years, so I think you look at Rivers really moreso as just a general contract benchmark. They are still comparable situations, even if not identical; I'm inclined to view that comparison better than the comparison between Flacco and say Fitzpatrick or Kolb (numbers are too low, players nowhere near as proven) or Manning/Brady (numbers are too high.)




  7. #172

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    Rivers' final year was certainly better, there's no doubting that, and his leverage was higher, but I don't know about Flacco's leverage being "nowhere near." As I said their body of work was very similar, and teams presumably place more stock into the body of work rather than only the preceding year. I think you're overvaluing the importance of that single year--exactly what Rivers and his negotiators would have liked the Chargers to do. AJ Smith is perhaps the NFL's most iron-fisted negotiator, so I doubt he would have fallen into that trap.

    In any event, I'm not sure how easy it is to quantify and compare the leverage of players, anyway. There's so much more that goes into it than just their stats over the past few years, so I think you look at Rivers really moreso as just a general contract benchmark. They are still comparable situations, even if not identical; I'm inclined to view that comparison better than the comparison between Flacco and say Fitzpatrick or Kolb (numbers are too low, players nowhere near as proven) or Manning/Brady (numbers are too high.)
    I agree with most of this, except the part about teams paying for the body of work more than the preceding year.

    The goal of the team, is to pay a fair price for future performance. The only way past performance matters is how it helps you guess at the future performance. A one year anomaly should be viewed as such, of course. But the trajectory of the results matters. Rivers trajectory was up, and he had already put up an elite season, and that season was the last one. With Joe, the results have been good for sure, but last year the trajectory took a big hit. No doubt the Ravens, as well as fans, know that Joe played a lot better than his stats in 2011. But knowing that is only a mitigating factor, I don't think it goes all the way to the "he made the final step" territory like Rivers was in (or at least could be easily argued he was in).

    I guess what I am saying is that, even with the exact same 4 year stat totals in all categories, Joe would look a lot better in the negotiating room if his 1st year had been worse, his second year had been a little worse, and those extra stats/results were applied to last year to get it up around or above his 3rd year. In other words, same totals, better trajectory.

    I agree Rivers is a decent choice as a benchmark. There are a few others out there, even if slightly above or below Joe's exact level. I have no idea what the final deal will be, but I think it will depend on Joe more than the Ravens. In my opinion, Joe is more likely to be "unreasonable" than the Ravens in terms of the negotiations, but we'll see. Hopefully it goes smoothly though.




  8. #173

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    I agree with most of this, except the part about teams paying for the body of work more than the preceding year.

    The goal of the team, is to pay a fair price for future performance. The only way past performance matters is how it helps you guess at the future performance. A one year anomaly should be viewed as such, of course. But the trajectory of the results matters. Rivers trajectory was up, and he had already put up an elite season, and that season was the last one. With Joe, the results have been good for sure, but last year the trajectory took a big hit. No doubt the Ravens, as well as fans, know that Joe played a lot better than his stats in 2011. But knowing that is only a mitigating factor, I don't think it goes all the way to the "he made the final step" territory like Rivers was in (or at least could be easily argued he was in).

    I guess what I am saying is that, even with the exact same 4 year stat totals in all categories, Joe would look a lot better in the negotiating room if his 1st year had been worse, his second year had been a little worse, and those extra stats/results were applied to last year to get it up around or above his 3rd year. In other words, same totals, better trajectory.

    I agree Rivers is a decent choice as a benchmark. There are a few others out there, even if slightly above or below Joe's exact level. I have no idea what the final deal will be, but I think it will depend on Joe more than the Ravens. In my opinion, Joe is more likely to be "unreasonable" than the Ravens in terms of the negotiations, but we'll see. Hopefully it goes smoothly though.
    I agree with you on this. it is definitely about trajectory and paying for future, not past performance, hence why older (30+) players arent getting paid mega contracts. The thing that im not sure how theyll work around is the fact that yeah his stats went down eventhough he arguably progressed as a player (id say he did), but how much of that do they actually factor into as their own fault? If we didnt have the green receivers and the lockout, whos to say he doesnt have even better stats. Obviously theyll use that to their advantage but how far will they let their own shortcomings hold up negotiations?
    -JAB




  9. #174
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Where Ravens Fans Roam Free
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Why couldn't the Ravens give Flacco a base contract worth about $80 million over 6 years ($13.3 million/year), and build in performance escalators that would take his pay up to $95 million over 6 years ($15.8 million/year) if he performs like a top 5 QB statistically? Why wouldn't that be acceptable to Flacco and to the Ravens?




  10. #175
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Northern Ireland, UK
    Posts
    2,812

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    that would be ideal for us, but it would come down to what is the guarentee
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt1 View Post
    Why couldn't the Ravens give Flacco a base contract worth about $80 million over 6 years ($13.3 million/year), and build in performance escalators that would take his pay up to $95 million over 6 years ($15.8 million/year) if he performs like a top 5 QB statistically? Why wouldn't that be acceptable to Flacco and to the Ravens?




  11. #176

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt1 View Post
    Why couldn't the Ravens give Flacco a base contract worth about $80 million over 6 years ($13.3 million/year), and build in performance escalators that would take his pay up to $95 million over 6 years ($15.8 million/year) if he performs like a top 5 QB statistically? Why wouldn't that be acceptable to Flacco and to the Ravens?
    If Flacco thinks he deserves $15M per year he would balk at the statistical strings attached to getting there. Especially when he cannot control his surrounding talent, the OC's schemes, and the team's general aversion to risk (on offense). That said, I am pretty much in your camp when it comes to whether Flacco should be paid like a top 5 QB (I don't think it is easily justifiable).

    It isn't that I think Joe is incapable of becoming one with a little more growth, or even that he is not one right now that is unfortunately trapped on a team where it won't show (though this is likely close to my feelings). It is just that I think it doesn't make sense to pay top 5 QB money when your team does not need, nor is set up to take advantage of, a top 5 QB. You only pay a guy top 5 QB money if he is going to be carrying your team almost by himself (see Rodgers, Brees, Brady, and even Eli to a large extent), earning that money, and putting up top 5 stats.

    If your team is set up so that all you need to win it all is a top 10-15 QB, and you find yourself with a top 5 QB, you have choices. 1) You can change the way you run your team to truly take advantage of your elite QB (not easy, and can violate the if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix rule), or 2) you can just pay the guy top 5 QB money to do top 10-15 QB work (waste of money), or 3) you can let the guy walk or trade him or something and try to find a top 10-15 QB (harder than it sounds).

    I think the Ravens would opt for 2) here if they felt Joe is a top 5 QB. Maybe move towards 1) slowly. I also am not sure they feel he is a top 5 QB even if they would never verbalize that feeling.

    As I said, I think Joe and his agent could make this an easy negotiation or an impossible negotiation, how it goes is mostly up to them. I think the Ravens are less of the wild card. I suspect they will be willing to overpay Joe compared to what they feel he could get elsewhere, but that this still doesn't quite reach top 5 level. Hopefully Joe isn't set on top 5 money like his agent implied.




  12. #177
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,040
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    There is a reason why Flacco's agent keeps talking about regular season and playoff wins and not focusing on the stats.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  13. #178
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Where Ravens Fans Roam Free
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by arnie_uk View Post
    that would be ideal for us, but it would come down to what is the guarentee
    I think the Ravens have enough trust in Flacco's ability and character to give him a very competitive guaranteed amount. The deal Philip Rivers got was as follows:

    8/24/2009: Signed a seven-year, $98.25 million contract. The deal contains $38.15 million guaranteed, including a $19.55 million signing bonus, Rivers' 2009-2010 base salaries, and a second-year option bonus of $6 million. $6 million of Rivers' 2011 salary is guaranteed for injury, but not skill or performance. 2011: $8.4 million, 2012: $10.2 million, 2013: $12 million, 2014: $13.8 million, 2015: $15.75 million, 2016: Free Agent

    To me, giving Flacco $40 million guaranteed would be acceptable under the terms I described in my previous post.
    Last edited by Dirt1; 05-24-2012 at 02:14 PM.




  14. #179
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Where Ravens Fans Roam Free
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    If Flacco thinks he deserves $15M per year he would balk at the statistical strings attached to getting there. Especially when he cannot control his surrounding talent, the OC's schemes, and the team's general aversion to risk (on offense). That said, I am pretty much in your camp when it comes to whether Flacco should be paid like a top 5 QB (I don't think it is easily justifiable).

    It isn't that I think Joe is incapable of becoming one with a little more growth, or even that he is not one right now that is unfortunately trapped on a team where it won't show (though this is likely close to my feelings). It is just that I think it doesn't make sense to pay top 5 QB money when your team does not need, nor is set up to take advantage of, a top 5 QB. You only pay a guy top 5 QB money if he is going to be carrying your team almost by himself (see Rodgers, Brees, Brady, and even Eli to a large extent), earning that money, and putting up top 5 stats.

    If your team is set up so that all you need to win it all is a top 10-15 QB, and you find yourself with a top 5 QB, you have choices. 1) You can change the way you run your team to truly take advantage of your elite QB (not easy, and can violate the if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix rule), or 2) you can just pay the guy top 5 QB money to do top 10-15 QB work (waste of money), or 3) you can let the guy walk or trade him or something and try to find a top 10-15 QB (harder than it sounds).

    I think the Ravens would opt for 2) here if they felt Joe is a top 5 QB. Maybe move towards 1) slowly. I also am not sure they feel he is a top 5 QB even if they would never verbalize that feeling.

    As I said, I think Joe and his agent could make this an easy negotiation or an impossible negotiation, how it goes is mostly up to them. I think the Ravens are less of the wild card. I suspect they will be willing to overpay Joe compared to what they feel he could get elsewhere, but that this still doesn't quite reach top 5 level. Hopefully Joe isn't set on top 5 money like his agent implied.
    The Ravens have done a pretty good job of stocking the team (offense and defense) with sufficient talent. The Ravens don't need to throw the ball 50 times per game for Flacco to have top 5 stats, but they do need a better offensive scheme though. If Flacco truly believes that he is a top 5 QB, then let him show it on the field. I understand you pay for projected future performance, but that is a level of performance that Flacco has not yet displayed. Flacco has said he deserves to be paid $15 million per year and that he views himself to be a top 5 QB. Flacco would get that amount if he plays like a top 5 QB. I think the terms I described would be very fair to Flacco and to the Ravens.
    Last edited by Dirt1; 05-24-2012 at 02:21 PM.




  15. #180
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,356
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Philly extend up LeSean McCoy

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt1 View Post
    Why couldn't the Ravens give Flacco a base contract worth about $80 million over 6 years ($13.3 million/year), and build in performance escalators that would take his pay up to $95 million over 6 years ($15.8 million/year) if he performs like a top 5 QB statistically? Why wouldn't that be acceptable to Flacco and to the Ravens?
    How can he perform like a top 5 QB in a run first offense with this group of WRs? That would be his argument and a legit one. It comes down to what is valued more. Individual statistics or wins. Since Joe has been the QB, the team has won consistently. Ray has been hurt, Ed's been hurt. Ray Rice has been hurt. Webb has been hurt. Yet, Flacco has played all of his games and they've won consistently.

    I don't think that Flacco is a top 5 QB. I think that he is top 10 and should be paid as such. However, the waters could be murky, because of what the team has asked of him and allowed him to do.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland