purple haze
-
Posts
4,544 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by purple haze
-
-
4 hours ago, Beck Water said:
OK, let's break this down.
Hamlin wasn't the 3rd string safety, he was the leading backup before he went down.
He made $1.45M last season (with playing time bonuses)
He is scheduled to make $940k this season and $1.055M next season.
Granted these amounts aren't hugely higher, but they are higher than $700k - between 34% and 200% higher, which is real $ to most of us
I don't know if Damar's appearances pay, or what appearances pay, but those $$ seem high for appearance money for medical groups like AHA, and his appearances aren't likely to last as next season rolls on.
We don't know (and probably Hamlin doesn't know) if he can play again. Still completing medical evaluations and follow ups, probably still working with a pulmonologist to try to improve lung function and capacity, then he needs to get back into his best football shape and see if he still has it, athletically. Then there's the mental aspect - can he cheerfully deal out and receive hits after what he went through? Does he want to?
We don't know how the Bills view him relative to Rapp, but like any elite athlete (and make no mistake - backups and PS guys in the NFL are very elite athletes), if he does play, doubt Hamlin is conceding he's 3rd string to Rapp.
I think if there were genuinely zero chance, he'd know it and McDermott would know it and they'd just announce it. JMO.
Reasoned analysis. A sip of water in the desert of hot takes.
-
On 3/28/2023 at 8:12 AM, BillStime said:
Actually agree with Jerry about something for a change:
UB stated they want to stay on campus. Pegula has extended the opportunity for them to play at the new stadium if they want to.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Lost said:
I really like Jonathan Mingo but the thought of taking 2 DL in the first 3 rds is laughable.
Why? Is our D line that good? 3 DT’s are free agents after this season. Epenesa is too I believe. You rather Beane spends a majority of free agent dollars on those positions next off-season?
-
2 hours ago, Big Turk said:
Agreed, but I mean what is he going to do, bench him?
Run the ball more. Less passing less need for him to scramble. Use the RB in the run game and less called run plays for Allen.
It will never totally go away but they can lessen the amount he runs.
-
30 minutes ago, Doc said:
No chance. The NFL will ensure he doesn't get a Watson-type deal next year if he sits out.
They’re already ensuring it. But if he really doesn’t want to be in Baltimore sitting out is his option. He couldn’t trust they’ll work out a deal to trade him if he shows up. After his tweets today, the Ravens better start plan B.
2 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:Sounds like you are on to something. However, I have to ask. Why do you think they'd be able to pull off this far more complex process when no one could make the simplest processes work?
Do you really think there is a team out there willing to pay him $270M guaranteed, but not give up two 1sts for a QB who they think is worth $270M?
JMO, but I dont think the two 1sts are the thing that is holding this all up.
He’ll take less elsewhere, but not from the Ravens. That’s the way things look at this point. I think there is bad blood between Jackson and the organization.
-
5 hours ago, FireChans said:
What do you mean they could trade him for 2 picks already? Who is negotiating with Lamar right now?
His rights still belong to the Ravens. I believe they can trade those rights. The Ravens are trying to play things out with the non-exclusive tag but Jackson has no intention of playing for the Ravens.
-
4 minutes ago, QLBillsFan said:
Actually, the strategy the Ravens are employing is smart. The non exclusive forces other teams in the NFL to create his current market value which they can then match. They gave him the 133m guaranteed offer which he didn’t think was of value. If they don’t match it they get 2# 1’s which allows them to move on. From a 12-14 ranked qb who has to some degree been figured out, injury prone, who needs an offense geared around his skills. That to me is the making the best of the situation. The Ravens will survive this. Lamar 🤷🏻♂️?
Jackson will get paid somewhere. The Ravens don’t want to lose him. They could trade him for two picks already. They want other teams to do their work for them and they want to be able to say they had no choice but to let him go. It’s all optics. I get it though.
No guarantees they find a better QB. It’s a crap shoot. A lot of teams have been in that QB desert for years.
-
12 hours ago, Doc said:
His market value is what the market determines. Since neither the Ravens nor any other team feels he's worth a fully guaranteed contract, that's his market.
I think his market value is being manipulated by the owners, but it is what is. He’s not getting that Watson deal even if there was an owner out there willing to give it to him. Now, it’s about where he’ll play next.
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:
Paid him what...a fully guaranteed salary? That's was never going to happen, no matter how much he demanded it. You know this would be foolish.
What he has meant to the Ravens? Well let's see..
5 seasons, 101 passing TDs. 24 rushing TDs. One season over 3000 yards. 3 playoff appearances in a row to start his career: threw total of 3 TDs vs 5 ints. 1 win. Season has ended weeks before Christmas the past 2 years. Ravens made the playoffs without him this season--and his backup had a better game than Jackson has ever had in the playoffs.
The Ravens were a more successful team with Flacco than Jackson, hands down.
Cool. If he’s no better than Flacco or Huntley, let him go. Take the tag off or trade him. Why hold onto him if the backup is better? Play Huntley. Good luck to them.
-
10 hours ago, FireChans said:
Yeah after making him sit out a year lmao
Possibly. But that doesn’t help them. Jackson will get paid eventually. He’ll be fine. Good luck to the Ravens on their QB hunt. Maybe they find a better one. Maybe not.
-
1 hour ago, FireChans said:
The Ravens don’t have to pay it. They are absolutely welcome to let Jackson languish under the tag pursuing an offer that isn’t coming, and then, next season, they can do it all again!
They won’t. That does them no good. Same way the Texans eventually traded Watson.
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, Doc said:
That's in-part what the franchise tag was created for, not to mention the fines that would accumulate if he were to sit out in protest. He'll have to play for the franchise amount and then we'll see what happens after the season.
3 minutes ago, NoSaint said:
that something has happened once in all of existence doesn’t define a marketYes, it does. it’s Jackson’s market because he’s a commensurate player to the QB who got that deal. It’s not Daniel Jones or Sam Darnold’s market.
Jackson should ask for that deal. The Ravens don’t have to pay it. It’s business.
-
2
-
-
Just now, Doc said:
They can't. No one wants to meet his demands.
The NFL won’t allow the demand to be approached. I get it from the league’s perspective. Jackson will eventually take less. But he’s not taking less from the Ravens. Get rid of that tag and Jackson will be signed somewhere at some point.
The Ravens want it both ways. I doubt that works out for them in the end.
18 minutes ago, QLBillsFan said:Your points are solid. If in fact the teams were following the Browns lead. They are not and for good reason. The reasons on Lamar have been presented multiple times. If he thinks his value surpasses Mahomes or even JA he’s delusional.
Mahomes and Allen signed deals before Watson. Their organizations locked them up at first chance. If they hadn’t those two could demand what Jackson is, and should be.
-
3
-
-
7 minutes ago, SCBills said:
What’s market value for, at most, the 4th best QB in the conference / 2nd best in his division?
What’s market value for a running QB that’s injury prone?
Part of being a franchise QB is being the face of the organization and not bringing bad publicity to your team. Do you think Allen, Burrow, Mahomes, Herbert, Lawrence etc would be messing around with some rando named Ken Francis and pushing a ridiculous home workout system?If the Raven’s think of Jackson the way you do then they should trade him and go find a QB better if they can. Can’t have it both ways: he’s not good enough but we don’t want to lose him. Why? If he’s as mid as you think he is?
2 QBs you named were paid as soon as they were eligible to be paid and the other two most likely will be. So, unlike Jackson they didn’t or won’t have to be in this circumstance with their organizations.
Jackson has said little or nothing. He can’t control media narratives or fans emotions on Twitter or the message boards. He’s not bringing bad publicity to the Ravens. The Ravens put themselves in this position. Pay him or trade him. It’s not that hard.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, QLBillsFan said:
Seems to be working out well for Lamar.. well played
It’s not working out for the Ravens either. And it’s hard to fight the system. QBs of commensurate talents get more, in some way, than the previous QB received on their contract. Usually. So, why is that different now? It’s not Jackson’s fault the Haslem’s gave out that bad deal to Watson.
He’ll get paid a lot of money somewhere, eventually; not what the market dictated he should get, most likely, but he’ll be a generationally wealthy young man still living out his dream. He wins either way. Will it be in Baltimore? I’d bet, no. So, in that case, who wins, again? The QB who gets paid and plays or the team in search of a player like Lamar Jackson and can’t find one? 🤷🏾♂️
5 minutes ago, Doc said:A fully-guaranteed contract is not market value.
It is when it has been established in the market. Again, blame the Haslem’s for setting that market, not Jackson for asking for that type of deal.
-
21 hours ago, SCBills said:
The one team that took a chance on him, you want him to do them like that?
He’s, at best, the 4th QB in the AFC and I can bet more GM’s than not would rather have Herbert or Lawrence, which drops him to 6th in a fight with 40 year old Rodgers.
He has zero self awareness and now comes off like a complete sideshow.
This is business. The best QB the Ravens’ organization has ever had, who puts asses in seats weekly, and is big on helping the community as well, is the man they don’t want to pay a market value contract? Why do the Ravens want to do him like that?
if they don’t think he’s worth what he’s asking for, trade him. Go find a QB who is worth it then. Good luck to them.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:
So he would take a non fully guaranteed contract from another team? He's just trying to screw over the Ravens with this specific demand?
To what end?
He’s trying to get what he wants and feels he deserves based on his accomplishments and what the market set. Had the Ravens paid him earlier on this situation wouldn’t exist. The Ravens have themselves to blame.
With what Jackson has meant to the Ravens, no, I would not take less from them. If I had to settle it would be somewhere else where I have no history.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:
Th "team" thing confuses me the most in all of this.
The Ravens took a chance on Lamar when a lot of the league didn't believe in him and traded up to draft him with a SB winning,
high dollar QB, on the roster.
They made Lamar the starter and designed a team around him to succeed. Then they gave him an extremely good offer at the start
of his 4th season. I can only look at life through my own eyes, but I would have shown my "loyalty" to the team and signed it.
The Baltimore ownership and management have to feel a lot of regret where they find themselves now. I wonder if Lamar even considers that?
You all are wild. Why should he consider that? This is basic business. Watson signed a deal for 230 million guaranteed. Jackson is no less accomplished and his contract talks were coming up. Of course he’ll want what Watson received plus more. That’s usually how it works. Lamar doesn’t have the issue. The Haslem’s bad decision making is the issue.
if I’m Lamar Jackson I won’t take less from Baltimore. If I have to take less it will be in another uniform and I would not play on the tag either. Sit out. In that scenario they will trade him eventually.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Gregg said:
It might take Hall a couple of years before he regains his form like it did Barkley.
Possibly. But he might be fine. Either way he can still catch and would be a distraction for the defense.
-
3 hours ago, MiltonWaddams said:
OBJ is the only receiver that should scare you on that list and he hasn’t played a game since February 2022 or a full season since 2019. Don’t let an agenda overtake basic analysis.
Wilson is the goods and if Rodgers winds up with the Jets you should be concerned with that WR group and Breece Hall coming out of the backfield too.
-
1
-
-
-
4 minutes ago, Chaos said:
Tanner McGee
Tanner McKee, from Stanford?
Ehhh, I don’t know about that. I can’t see him going in the first. -
1 hour ago, MrEpsYtown said:
So who is left who weighs more than 200 lbs?
Motor, Fournette, Elliott.
-
7 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:
I agree with you, but Beane will have to fight the urge to force the pick if the value isn’t there…If he is set on LB with the first pick, I hope he trades back…👍
At 27, unless a talent like Robinson is there, they should be trying to trade back anyway. We can most definitely use an extra 3rd. Problem is: who would teams be trading up for?
NFL draft rumors 2023
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Robinson is a great prospect. There are never guarantees but he checks all the boxes Beane likes on and off the field. That guy can play and would make the Bills offense harder to defend. He’s an offensive weapon in run and pass game. I doubt he goes low enough in the draft to even be in trade-up range though (20-25).