The OFFICIAL 2023 NFL Offseason Thread

[tennbengal]

And with Derek Carr getting that kind of money, there really can be no doubt about this.

Question - does this scenario unfold if Lamar Jackson had a big name agent involved?

If it was watson’s agent? Probsbly. One of the other agents? Maybe not.

[Pruitt IV]

I understand that Jackson's stock took a big fall last season, but come on...

Daniel Jones 4/$160 Million

[EdRomero]

This would be a nice time for Belichick to give a middle finger to the colluding owners and swoop in to sign Jackson, but Kraft won't let that happen.

[bfj]

Sports radio was fun this morning! I think the Ravens did something with Lamar. Hard to tell. I thought Jason LaCanfora (who does a daily radio show) was going to have a stroke yesterday. He was screaming into the mic about what liars the Ravens are and how they brought this on themselves. I called the show and asked the producer if he was ok.

[tennbengal]

Bfj - ravens have to know that the fix is in - and no high offers coming his way - otherwise it makes no sense.

[bfj]

Bfj - ravens have to know that the fix is in - and no high offers coming his way - otherwise it makes no sense.

No doubt. The collusion has been arranged. They're fucked either way though. He's leaving and he'll be a huge pain in the ass until he does.

[L-Jam3]

Shenanigans like what they’re doing to Lamar angers me in so many ways, mostly because (a) Lamar, as well as all players in general, are grossly underpaid, as they’re the ones who make the sport entertaining AND are risking their health, (b) the people out there who are going to commend the teams as doing good business, and (c) despite this being a perfect reason to walk, just like when they force-fed the 17th game, I’ll still be there on that first Sunday in September because I’m a fucking mark to this. I know all the disgustingness that goes into making the sausage and yet I still eat it, knowing how bad it is, because it satisfies my taste buds.

[bfj]

Shenanigans like what they’re doing to Lamar angers me in so many ways, mostly because (a) Lamar, as well as all players in general, are grossly underpaid, as they’re the ones who make the sport entertaining AND are risking their health, (b) the people out there who are going to commend the teams as doing good business, and (c) despite this being a perfect reason to walk, just like when they force-fed the 17th game, I’ll still be there on that first Sunday in September because I’m a fucking mark to this. I know all the disgustingness that goes into making the sausage and yet I still eat it, knowing how bad it is, because it satisfies my taste buds.

It's a bad look for everyone. Some fans hate Lamar for doing this, some fans hate the team for doing this, some fans hate both the team and Lamar. I'm a Ravens' fan and I hate both of them at this point. I hate Lamar because you're being offered 165 million guaranteed dollars and the length of the contract you want, but that other 35 million non guaranteed is what's holding you up? I will never understand that. But go get paid and good luck. I hate the team because it should have never come to this. They should have ripped up his deal 2 years ago and given him a huge payday before the NFLPA and guaranteed deals were in his brain. But go get paid and good luck.

You know where I'll be on Sundays.

[GoodKarma]

All the Lamar talk seems to be burying the Daniel Jones contract...which is inexcusable at 40M per. He had a nice season but come on. I can't wait to see what Joe Burrow ends up getting.

[The Sybian]

All the Lamar talk seems to be burying the Daniel Jones contract...which is inexcusable at 40M per. He had a nice season but come on. I can't wait to see what Joe Burrow ends up getting.

He averaged less than 1 TD a game each of the last 3 seasons. 24 TDs his rookie year, then 11, 10 and 15 the last 3.

[Gunpowder]

Daniel Jones 2022:

120 carries for 708 yards, 7 TDs

I thought we were afraid of paying running QBs

[Gunpowder]

Shenanigans like what they’re doing to Lamar angers me in so many ways, mostly because (a) Lamar, as well as all players in general, are grossly underpaid, as they’re the ones who make the sport entertaining AND are risking their health, (b) the people out there who are going to commend the teams as doing good business, and (c) despite this being a perfect reason to walk, just like when they force-fed the 17th game, I’ll still be there on that first Sunday in September because I’m a fucking mark to this. I know all the disgustingness that goes into making the sausage and yet I still eat it, knowing how bad it is, because it satisfies my taste buds.

It's a bad look for everyone. Some fans hate Lamar for doing this, some fans hate the team for doing this, some fans hate both the team and Lamar. I'm a Ravens' fan and I hate both of them at this point. I hate Lamar because you're being offered 165 million guaranteed dollars and the length of the contract you want, but that other 35 million non guaranteed is what's holding you up? I will never understand that. But go get paid and good luck. I hate the team because it should have never come to this. They should have ripped up his deal 2 years ago and given him a huge payday before the NFLPA and guaranteed deals were in his brain. But go get paid and good luck.

You know where I'll be on Sundays.

I put most of the blame on the franchise tag, as usual.

[EnochRoot]

The franchise tag is collusion, codified into the NFL bylaws, cuz two first round picks for the right to negotiate a deal with a tagged player? Yowza.

The NFLPA freakin sucks.

[sancarlos]

The NFLPA freakin sucks.

True. But, it doesn’t happen in a vacuum. The players have short, uncertain careers, with limited time to make their money, and historically, as a group, have been very unwilling to hold the line against owners. More so than athletes in other sports. The owners know this and hold their line on things like this, knowing the players (and thus, their union) will always blink first.

[Gunpowder]

Yeah it would probably take an actual for real strike

[Brontoburglar]

it's also making a great case for superstar players looking for top-tier contracts to always have an agent

[mister d]

That's TBD, right? If some team does jump in with a guaranteed contract then not having an agent who would explain Watson was an anomaly and he needs to let that go would have been a hinderance.

[Brontoburglar]

That's TBD, right? If some team does jump in with a guaranteed contract then not having an agent who would explain Watson was an anomaly and he needs to let that go would have been a hinderance.

not necessarily because the situation may be avoided entirely with a long-term deal much earlier.

[L-Jam3]

Does Lamar really need an agent to say “I’m better, I’m younger, and I’m not a rapist. That’s why I deserve more than Watson.”?

[mister d]

not necessarily because the situation may be avoided entirely with a long-term deal much earlier.

Is "the situation" just him not agreeing prior to the tag and all the talk that comes with that or did something happen?

[Brontoburglar]

not necessarily because the situation may be avoided entirely with a long-term deal much earlier.

Is "the situation" just him not agreeing prior to the tag and all the talk that comes with that or did something happen?

the franchise tag (which is bad for players, I'm not advocating it's good, it's just the parameters we're dealing with here) along with the apparent devolution of the relationship between both parties over the end of the season when he was injured. the former obviously doesn't happen with a long-term deal in place earlier and the latter may not either

feels like a mediator of sorts -- even someone who is hired by the player to be the advocate -- would have prevented a lot of *sweeps arm in general direction*

[mister d]

Yeah, that's where I want to hold judgment. You're right to this point, but if he finds his fully guaranteed deal I think you can say its because he didn't have a mediator trying to bridge the gap and stick to the norms. And also he won't lose 10% of what he eventually signs for.

[A_B]

Yeah, that's where I want to hold judgment. You're right to this point, but if he finds his fully guaranteed deal I think you can say its because he didn't have a mediator trying to bridge the gap and stick to the norms. And also he won't lose 10% of what he eventually signs for.

Agents in the NFL get a much lower percentage, I think, at least of salary. I think the bigger benefit of an agent is working all the backchannels and also the endorsement market. Theoretically, Jackson should get the best deal of any market right now given who else is available. But the owners have decided to hold firm that Watson's contract is an outlier and that Haslam fucked up (which he did, absolutely).

Now, when Burrow gets that much guaranteed, it's going to be an absolute shitshow of takes, but at least he's with the Bengals, who can still fuck it up.

[mister d]

This all seems like a good reason for a hypothetical team with a good roster and a hole at QB to not rush to plug but rather wait for a 20-something QB who won't take less than 100% guaranteed.

[tennbengal]

So…you all are looking past the issue I tried to highlight last page. I don’t think any team is going to 100% guarantee the contract. That’s the collusion part. I think the nfl is drawing the line at Watson and never again. Hence the weird rush of teams that need QBs claiming they have no interest in a former mvp at qb who is 45-16 as a starter and just 26.

[mister d]

Unless QBs collude the opposite way and refuse to sign long-term deals until some other team breaks?

[Brontoburglar]

I think this is worth reading and I believe the below is a very key point to it all

Added another agent, “People are talking like it’s collusion that Lamar might not get a fully guaranteed deal, but think about the two quarterbacks that did. When Watson got his, there were four teams involved and ultimately Cleveland did the fully guaranteed deal after they were told they were out of the running. That means out of four teams that were all coming to the table with offers, only the Browns were willing to give Deshaun a fully guaranteed deal, and they only did it after they were told that they were out of it. The Browns believed that the fully guaranteed deal was their only option to getting him. And that was on top of Deshaun having the control of a no-trade clause and having sat out an entire year of football. Think about all of those factors that had to go into that one situation.

"Then in the other, with Kirk Cousins, he played through two franchise tags to get to free agency to get his fully guaranteed deal from the Vikings, and he only did a three-year deal for less money than the New York Jets would have given him. So in the history of quarterbacks, the only two that got fully guaranteed deals either had a massive amount of leverage or played through two tags to get to free agency.

"Lamar doesn’t have the leverage of Watson and hasn’t played through two tags like Cousins. He’s under a franchise tag and hasn’t shown he will force a trade. So where’s the leverage to get a fully guaranteed deal?”

[Pruitt IV]

it's also making a great case for superstar players looking for top-tier contracts to always have an agent

This is (in my mind) absolutely the truth.

One the one hand, he's saving 10% in commissions. (Which at least in Canada are deductible). But on the other hand, look where he is now.

[EdRomero]

I think a lot of the noise is also writers being friendly with their best sources, agents, to push along the agenda of "see how important it is to have an agent."

[sancarlos]

I think a lot of the noise is also writers being friendly with their best sources, agents, to push along the agenda of "see how important it is to have an agent."

Hadn’t thought of that one, but it makes perfect sense.

[L-Jam3]

it's also making a great case for superstar players looking for top-tier contracts to always have an agent

This is (in my mind) absolutely the truth.

One the one hand, he's saving 10% in commissions. (Which at least in Canada are deductible). But on the other hand, look where he is now.

Never took that into consideration. He should just hire an agent and then sign with the Yellowknife Yetis.

[bfj]

Yeah, that's where I want to hold judgment. You're right to this point, but if he finds his fully guaranteed deal I think you can say its because he didn't have a mediator trying to bridge the gap and stick to the norms. And also he won't lose 10% of what he eventually signs for.

Agents in the NFL get a much lower percentage, I think, at least of salary. I think the bigger benefit of an agent is working all the backchannels and also the endorsement market. Theoretically, Jackson should get the best deal of any market right now given who else is available. But the owners have decided to hold firm that Watson's contract is an outlier and that Haslam fucked up (which he did, absolutely).

Now, when Burrow gets that much guaranteed, it's going to be an absolute shitshow of takes, but at least he's with the Bengals, who can still fuck it up.

I believe Lamar does very little in the way of endorsements. You don’t see him in TV commercials at all. Even local commercials don’t feature Lamar.

[Gunpowder]

it's also making a great case for superstar players looking for top-tier contracts to always have an agent

Yeah, Josh Allen's agent could have used his magic to get him $32 mil a year over 8 years

[Gunpowder]

That's TBD, right? If some team does jump in with a guaranteed contract then not having an agent who would explain Watson was an anomaly and he needs to let that go would have been a hinderance.

not necessarily because the situation may be avoided entirely with a long-term deal much earlier.

A player has to knowingly sign a lowball contract for that to happen. Most of them do but if Lamar Jackson didn't want a deal like that it doesn't matter who his agent was. What did LeVeon Bell's agent get?

[Gunpowder]

Added another agent, “People are talking like it’s collusion that Lamar might not get a fully guaranteed deal, but think about the two quarterbacks that did. When Watson got his, there were four teams involved and ultimately Cleveland did the fully guaranteed deal after they were told they were out of the running. That means out of four teams that were all coming to the table with offers, only the Browns were willing to give Deshaun a fully guaranteed deal, and they only did it after they were told that they were out of it. The Browns believed that the fully guaranteed deal was their only option to getting him. And that was on top of Deshaun having the control of a no-trade clause and having sat out an entire year of football. Think about all of those factors that had to go into that one situation.

How does Lamar Jackson not have nearly the same leverage? He can pick among various teams and tell one no unless they sweeten the offer. Is the issue that he's better than Watson and hasn't raped like 20 people?

Indy should just trade down for picks in 2025 and then send the traded down pick to Baltimore.

[Brontoburglar]

That's TBD, right? If some team does jump in with a guaranteed contract then not having an agent who would explain Watson was an anomaly and he needs to let that go would have been a hinderance.

not necessarily because the situation may be avoided entirely with a long-term deal much earlier.

A player has to knowingly sign a lowball contract for that to happen. Most of them do but if Lamar Jackson didn't want a deal like that it doesn't matter who his agent was. What did LeVeon Bell's agent get?

Allen and Mahomes didn't sign lowball extensions. And I believe the situation becomes different if, like LeVeon, Jackson says he's not going to play for the Ravens unless he gets a long-term deal.

Added another agent, “People are talking like it’s collusion that Lamar might not get a fully guaranteed deal, but think about the two quarterbacks that did. When Watson got his, there were four teams involved and ultimately Cleveland did the fully guaranteed deal after they were told they were out of the running. That means out of four teams that were all coming to the table with offers, only the Browns were willing to give Deshaun a fully guaranteed deal, and they only did it after they were told that they were out of it. The Browns believed that the fully guaranteed deal was their only option to getting him. And that was on top of Deshaun having the control of a no-trade clause and having sat out an entire year of football. Think about all of those factors that had to go into that one situation.

How does Lamar Jackson not have nearly the same leverage? He can pick among various teams and tell one no unless they sweeten the offer. Is the issue that he's better than Watson and hasn't raped like 20 people?

Indy should just trade down for picks in 2025 and then send the traded down pick to Baltimore.

crazily enough, no one has traded two firsts for a QB on the non-exclusive tag since the franchise tag was introduced and the only QB to get traded after signing the non-exclusive tag is Matt Cassel of all people.

I think that plays into it. So does the lack of a publicly stated holdout threat so far. I also think that Jackson's market may end up being bigger than the smokescreens are right now. I can see it being like a silent auction where you don't want to signal to the entire room you're interested by hovering at the table with the hope of working out a long-term deal and somehow trade less than two firsts in the process

of course, Lamar is a pretty great player to break the two firsts precedent for (and I think someone should). But Indy sneakily doesn't have that much cap room. Just $12M at the moment before saving $18M or so with a cut of Matt Ryan.

Atlanta should be the team to do it in my view

[Johnnie]

Atlanta should be the team to do it in my view

Bill Barnwell agrees with you.

[+] spoiler

1. Atlanta Falcons
Why they should consider it: After two years in the cap wilderness, the Falcons are finally in position to take a swing. General manager Terry Fontenot has cleared out more than $67 million in space, and with a wide-open NFC South, Atlanta can credibly hope to compete for a division title if it has a great offseason. Coach Arthur Smith's offense quietly ranked among the league's best despite starting Marcus Mariota and Desmond Ridder at quarterback, and its young core should only be better in 2023.

Why they shouldn't consider it: The Falcons might want to get a longer look at Ridder, who started the final four games of the season after being drafted in the third round last year. He looked overmatched in a debut loss to the Saints, but Ridder was better over the three ensuing contests, posting an above-average 54.5 QBR while winning a pair of games. Those victories admittedly came against Cardinals and Buccaneers teams with nothing to play for and backup quarterbacks in the game for some or all of the contest, so it might be worth taking those numbers with a grain of salt.

ESPN's Dianna Russini reported that the Falcons aren't intending to pursue Jackson, which would be a shame. Obviously, given that I have them as the best possible fit, I love the idea of Jackson going to the Falcons. It seems likely they'll move forward with Ridder or another quarterback under center in 2023.

Would they be a good fit for Jackson? I love the fit. Smith featured Mariota's ability to run in the offense a year ago, with Mariota averaging seven carries and 34 rushing yards per contest. It wouldn't be a stretch to insert Jackson into an expanded version of that role. From Week 9 on, Tyler Allgeier averaged 5.6 yards per carry and 79 rushing yards per game, and he would give Jackson some help in the backfield.

With the line taking a step forward after the improvement of right tackle Kaleb McGary -- who's now a free agent -- Jackson should be protected when he drops back. The big question is whether Jackson and Smith can coax big plays out of Drake London and Kyle Pitts in the passing attack. Pitts was much better in 2021 without London than with the big wideout in 2022, and London played his best football after Pitts was sidelined by a right knee injury. Having used consecutive top-10 picks on pass-catchers, Fontenot clearly was preparing to build an offense for his quarterback of the future.

Would they be willing to trade two first-round picks? The Falcons sorely need to add players to their front seven, but unless they think Ridder is a franchise quarterback in the making, it would be reasonable for Fontenot to package his next two first-rounders to go get Jackson.

What would a deal look like? The Ravens might try to make a move for cornerback A.J. Terrell after the 2020 first-round pick took a step backward last season, but given Atlanta's cap space, this would likely be an offer sheet and a deal involving two first-round picks. The Ravens would inherit the No. 8 pick in 2023 and have the possibility of landing another top-10 pick next year, while the Falcons would have a viable path toward their first winning record since 2017.

[Rex]

Maybe the Falcons are playing the long game here. I can’t imagine Ridder being the reason. He’s no Brett Farv

[Gunpowder]

of course, Lamar is a pretty great player to break the two firsts precedent for (and I think someone should). But Indy sneakily doesn't have that much cap room. Just $12M at the moment before saving $18M or so with a cut of Matt Ryan.

Indianapolis has like $103 mil in space next season. Unless a 6 year old child is their GM, I think they could figure out the necessary structure.

[mister d]

What if that 6 year old child/GM has a vested interest in preserving their working relationship with other non-child GMs (and owners) that supersedes their desire to win?