Yikes

comet52 wrote:

Even Lawrence isn't particularly special.  He's been basically average, though he did just get paid like a guy who puts a team on his back and carries it to a title.  Nice gig if you can get it.

Well, that's kind of the point....not many can do it even to an average level. And Lawrence still has upside, he's 24 years old. Paying on the come is part of the NFL QB game now.

MaroonBells wrote:


So spend a draft pick on another QB so you don't have to pay the guy you took with the 1st overall pick three years ago? Despite the fact that he's thrown for 4,000 yards both of his last two seasons and went to the Pro Bowl? Look, he's not perfect, but this isn't Kenny Picket or Justin Fields here. You just pay the guy.

I don't understand how some fans have such an issue with paying players. You'd think it was coming out of their own pockets. Has he really earned that contract? Hard to say he has. But its what you do today, bet on the come.

purplefaithful wrote:

Ive never been wowed by Lawrence since he got to the NFL. He's also a poster child for how fans need to be patient with these young guys, it takes time.

I think @MB hit it - you are not paying a guy based on what he's done. It's about upside.

Bet on the come if they show upside. Its always the way. What's the alternative?
[hr]

comet52 wrote:


Why does having an opinion that Lawrence isn't worth the money constitute "having an issue"?  It's just an opinion, Sticky.

The overpaid, average/good qb with a great team around him model is extremely hard.  Who's pulled it off recently?  The 49ers and they lost both times to ... the great qb.  That's the model that wins most of the time.  The other one is the years of frustration and heartbreak and believing in some guy who isn't ever going to get you there while the fan base argues about it. 

Teams are going to overpay because let's face it, there isn't a supply of Goat qb's out there waiting to be drafted, so they go with what they know.  But those overpays put a definite cap on their likelihood of ever winning it all.  They hamstring the ability to build that great team around the average/good guy, and that in itself is really hard, most teams cannot pull it off, ever.  I don't pretend to have an easy answer to the problem, like "just draft a qb every year".  That process involves developing guys, getting them playing time, it's imo not realistic or teams would do it.  You have to commit to some path, even if it's a bad one.

But why is the path 'a bad one'? You commit to what you think may happen because nothing is a guarantee. Its all hype until you strike gold. NFL GMs are just a bunch of gold miners.

comet52 wrote:

It's bad relative to having that generational qb talent and always being in the mix for a title.  But there aren't enough goats to go around so teams have to settle for sheep. ;)

So what team other than KC has been in the 'mix for a title' every year? Other than Patrick Mahomes, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning? Kansas City, Tampa Bay (with Brady) and New England have won 5 of the last 6 Superbowls. Guys like Nick Foles and Matthew Stafford over the last 10 years are flukes. Russ Wilson wins one by throwing for a whopping 206 yards, it was the Legion of Boom. 

Generational QB talent is beyond scarce. The hope is a guy with talent, like Lawrence, will have a breakthrough year. Joe Flacco and Colin K. played in a Super Bowl. Trevor Lawrence sure as hell can get there with the right team around him. So on the list of top paid QBs, who's a generational talent other than Patrick Mahomes under your guidelines? This is the kind of fan think that is so goofy. They all get paid coin to become something the odds say they'll never become. Burrow, Jackson, Herbert, Hurts....why are they getting paid? None of them are in the mix every year, but can win it all under the right circumstances. Just like Trevor Lawrence. If you think this is bad, wait until you see the contract for Dak Prescott....it will eclipse them all. Jared Goff? Being paid big time. He's a generational talent? Nope, but he's been to a Superbowl and almost got there again with Detroit.

BET ON THE COME.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/trevor-lawrence-contract-heres-why-jaguars-qb-landed-record-deal-despite-underwhelming-start-to-career/

purplefaithful wrote:


Thats a good read, pretty much nails it;

[font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]It's not like Pro Bowl or especially All-Pro quarterbacks grow on trees. Since Prescott entered the league in 2016, [/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]NFL teams[/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] have drafted 95 quarterbacks. [/font]

[font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Of those 95 players, 65 have appeared in at least one game. Just six -- Prescott, Wentz, Mahomes, Jackson, Allen and Hurts -- have made at least one All-Pro team. Six out of 95, over an eight-year span. [/font]

[font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]That's how difficult it is to find high-level quarterback play, even now, when teams have more resources at their disposal than at any time in the history of the league. And that's why, when you find one who is[/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]good[/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif], and who you think has even a[/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] chance[/font][font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] to be great, it's worth it to retain him and do your level best to put him in position to succeed. [/font]

[font='FS Industrie', FSIndustrie-Bold, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]If you don't, there's no telling how long you might have to wait to get another chance at that type of talent, and what you might have to give up in order to land him.[/font]

Yep. And its why you pay Trevor Lawrence. Its also why not resigning Cousins has some risk. Its rare that a guy as productive as Cousins at the QB position was allowed to sign elsewhere. But that's water under the bridge now.

The NFL has lost its mind with QB salaries. So now one pretty good half of a season gets you this?

https://x.com/TPPSkol/status/1803589800408351011

MaroonBells wrote:


For all intents and purposes, there are only two kinds of QBs in the NFL: the ones you keep and the ones you replace. The ones you keep, you pay. And whether they are "good" "great" or "elite" has very little bearing on how much you pay them. That is based mostly on WHEN you pay them. The more recent the contract, the higher the pay.  

So yes, Jordan Love will be the highest paid QB in the NFL when the time comes and nobody should be surprised by that. I just hope we're saying the same thing about JJM 4 years from now.

Unfortunately, highest paid QB doesn't mean most successful QB. Its why now owners are looking to have a salary cap on QBs. Its gotten stupid. Its trending towards rewarding unrealized potential and parts of seasons. Slippery slope.

purplefaithful wrote:

A separate cap for QB's is a matter of when and not if imo.

I heard someone today theorizing that once Danny Dimes got his $40mm a year, every agent for an NFL QB was incredulous and salivating.

Yeah that seemed to break some ice for a player that shouldn't have been the ice breaker, you know? Now look at the situation New York is in with DD. I still think Love has some proving to do, but he's going to be paid as the #1 QB in football. Not sure this is what owners had intended but agents always find a way to break through in areas unforeseen.

JimmyinSD wrote:


Only if he has earned it,  if they pay him out of fear,  and that's what's drives this stupidity is fear that they next guy may be worse,  them those GMs should be fired.  If they aren't the best then they shouldn't get paid that way,  only the best should be resetting the markets.  It's not the agents faults that the GMs are shitty and have created a system that rewards mediocrity by bucking to the demands. 

I would rather they lose him to free agency than to see them get handcuffed like so many other teams have been.

The issue is it just takes one shitty, desperate GM to set the market, i.e. Danny Dimes and the Giants. Now the standard is set and the only place to go is up. Or the Deshaun Watson trade and contract. 90% of the GMs can be solid, it takes just a few to turn things upside down. Include Russ Wilson in that when he went to Denver.

MaroonBells wrote:


But QB salary increases aren’t really outpacing team revenue and cap increases. Average revenue went up 14% last year, salary cap went up a similar amount and I suspect if you do the math, QB salaries will have increased by that same amount. 

QB salaries represent a higher percentage of cap now than they used to (at the expense of RBs and IOLs I suspect). But I think that’s in keeping with how important the position has become to modern offenses.

Not true.  https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5512446/2024/05/22/exploding-nfl-quarterback-salaries-explained-plus-starter-battles-in-otas/

From 2018 to 2023, the NFL’s highest-paid quarterback saw their APY increase a total of 64 percent, while the NFL’s salary cap increased just 26.5 percent.




And it’s not just the top of the market that has benefitted. The tenth-highest QB salary in 2018, Joe Flacco’s $22 million, covered 12.4 percent of the cap. In 2023, Josh Allen’s $43 million ranked 10th, but still covered 19.1 percent (which is more than Rodgers, the highest-paid QB, took up in 2018).

MaroonBells wrote:


Interesting. I looked for the numbers on this but couldn't find it. So I stand corrected. It looks like QB salaries are actually outpacing cap increases. Not that it matters much to owners, who make money regardless.  

But I think all of this ties to how important the QB position has become in the last 10 years. The % of cap number is the real eye opener. Back when Cousins signed his deal with Minnesota, a number in the mid teens was considered very high. Now it's the mid 20s.

Where it matters is as a percentage of the overall cap. That's the impact. Of course the owners make money regardless, but how lean can you go in other areas of the team and still win consistently? Where's the tipping point in causal effect to wins? Although the QB is obviously the most important part of the team, but he doesn't operate in a vacuum for success. You need a Patrick Mahomes and Andy Reid to overcome a top-heavy cap and that won't happen with Trevor Lawrence, Jordan Love or anyone else leading your team. Kansas City is an anomaly on top of an anomaly.

JimmyinSD wrote:


I've been trying to make this argument for years,  the players contract has to be commensurate with what he brings to the game,  overpaying average or below average players because of the position they play is not a way to build a championship caliber roster.

QBs are going to be 'overpaid' just because of the importance of the position, but now its getting very skewed compared to its growth and the growth of the cap. Its not aligned.

MaroonBells wrote:


But what's a bad contract? Would you rather have Joe Burrow or Justin Herbert and the money it requires to keep them ($55M and $52M) or be in a position where you're still looking for a guy like that?

Yeah, a 'bad' contract can be in the eye of the beholder or only in retrospect it becomes bad.....but that's part of the risk of signing anyone since these have become guaranteed. Its part of the game now and like I've mentioned before, you are betting 'on the come' in some cases because the alternative is worse or more risky.

This ridiculous Darnold trade at midseason thing is just hanging out there. He hasn't played one snap in the regular season but this stupid rumor is getting kicked around by these fringe sites to keep the clicks and view coming.

MaroonBells wrote:


Nope, not even close, and I'm not even 100% convinced he can repeat what he did the second half of last year. But those are probably the two most recent examples that argue for the "sit-a-year" camp. There are others: Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Palmer, Rivers, Romo, Cousins....with Sanchez, Mariota, Winston and Wentz being failures that argue against starting a QB right away. 

Of course there are always exceptions. No amount of sitting helped Tim Tebow or Jake Locker, and starting right away didn't seem to adversely affect Joe Burrow and Russell Wilson. But it's hard to look at the data and not come away convinced there is a clear leader in this debate.

I think age is a factor, as well as how much passing you did in college. Will Levis is 25 years old already. JJM is 21 years old and won't be 22 until next year. CJ Stround did a really nice job last season, but he also threw a bunch at Ohio State. The right trajectory for McCarthy is to sit his ass as much as possible this season, if not the whole year. One size does not fit all, of course, its been said before and I agree.