http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000495161/article/cam-newton-panthers-reach-1038m-extension

Cam Newton becomes the latest QB to join the $20m club. With Tannehill at $19 and Matt Ryan over $20, we can't help but be amazed at what a great deal the Ravens got for Flacco.

Same can be said about the Packers with Rodgers.

Of course older contracts will look better. Most of these contracts one up the previous ones so a contract signed after the 2012 season will look better than the one after the 2014 season. Also, the Ravens haven't paid Flacco shit so far. He is due like 28+ million per year over the next three I think.

I hope Flacco sees those numbers and decides to hold out for more money, further wrecking the cap situation in Baltimore.

(06-03-2015, 01:04 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: I hope Flacco sees those numbers and decides to hold out for more money, further wrecking the cap situation in Baltimore.

Luvnut........is that you?

(06-02-2015, 07:14 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000495161/article/cam-newton-panthers-reach-1038m-extension

Cam Newton becomes the latest QB to join the $20m club. With Tannehill at $19 and Matt Ryan over $20, we can't help but be amazed at what a great deal the Ravens got for Flacco.

Same can be said about the Packers with Rodgers.

Seriously.

Over the course of time the "worst" deals always get replaced with even worse deals.

Giving a head case like Newton this kind of money is just dumb.

Edit: What kind of deal will Russell Wilson, who has been to two Super Bowls and won one, going to get?!?!

(06-03-2015, 08:30 AM)GMDino Wrote: Seriously.

Over the course of time the "worst" deals always get replaced with even worse deals.

Giving a head case like Newton this kind of money is just dumb.

Edit:  What kind of deal will Russell Wilson, who has been to two Super Bowls and won one, going to get?!?!

I wouldn't call Matt Ryan's deal the "worst" deal...

(06-03-2015, 06:07 AM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Luvnut........is that you?

I think a Luvnit reference is hilarious and all, but some of you guys pretend that the salary cap doesn't exist or just doesn't matter.

The fact that Flacco is going to be making $28.5+ and $31+ in 2016 and 2017 would definitely be an issue to me if I were a Ravens' fan. You're not even slightly concerned with those numbers?

Looking at where the team is at cap-wise, they don't look to be in terrible position as a lot of the better players and some role players seem to be locked up through at least 2017, but you can't pretend that having to pay a QB $28+ million for a couple of years straight isn't going to affect near future transactions. The rapist's new extension averages a little more, but at least he doesn't have any years where he's eating up a giant chunk of the cap out of nowhere, not to mention he's a better QB.

I've always thought Joe's deal was "meh", as I didn't get as riled up as a lot of fellow Bengals fans by saying that it's so ridiculous and that he's extremely overpaid. I've just always thought it was structured oddly. Some people say that it's not a big deal because it will be restructured, but that just pushes money into the future further screwing with their cap. Assuming they want him around for the long haul, which they seemingly do, they're probably better off just leaving everything as-is and accepting that they're going to be paying a mediocre regular season QB the biggest cap hit at his position for a couple of years. That's also assuming Luck's numbers don't hit $28-$31.

Oh, and paying $20 million per for Cam Newton is almost as dumb as giving Andy Dalton $20 million per year. At least the Bengals were smart and only gave Average Andy $17 million in guaranteed money. Those idiots in Carolina gave Newton $60 million guaranteed. That's a LOT of guaranteed coin, especially for a non-elite QB. It will be interesting to see the full contract once details are released.

(06-03-2015, 08:53 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I think a Luvnit reference is hilarious and all, but some of you guys pretend that the salary cap doesn't exist or just doesn't matter.

The fact that Flacco is going to be making $28.5+ and $31+ in 2016 and 2017 would definitely be an issue to me if I were a Ravens' fan. You're not even slightly concerned with those numbers?

restructuring of contracts is common practice. Neither party went into that deal thinking that they weren't going to. His agent even called it a 3 year deal when they signed it.

(06-03-2015, 09:07 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: restructuring of contracts is common practice. Neither party went into that deal thinking that they weren't going to. His agent even called it a 3 year deal when they signed it.

Restructuring is common practice of bad contracts that didn't seem bad when originally signed.

I'm just wondering, do you know how contract restructures work? You seem like a knowledgeable guy, so it's odd that you have no issue with a restructure or $28 - $31 cap numbers for a non-elite QB. The money doesn't disappear, so it's either deal with the big numbers in 2016 and 2017 or shove it into signing bonuses in future years or voidable years.

IMO, unless they can get Joe to take a flat out paycut, not a restructure, they're likely better off leaving the money where it's at. I don't know why anyone would think differently. If the cap does rise again over the next 2 years, then it would make even more sense to leave it where it's at now.

Even though I do think leaving it as-is would be the best decision, it would worry me as a Ravens' fan to see the QB accounting for those gigantic cap hits when he isn't among the league's best of the best.

(06-03-2015, 09:25 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Restructuring is common practice of bad contracts that didn't seem bad when originally signed.

I'm just wondering, do you know how contract restructures work? You seem like a knowledgeable guy, so it's odd that you have no issue with a restructure or $28 - $31 cap numbers for a non-elite QB. The money doesn't disappear, so it's either deal with the big numbers in 2016 and 2017 or shove it into signing bonuses in future years or voidable years.

IMO, unless they can get Joe to take a flat out paycut, not a restructure, they're likely better off leaving the money where it's at. I don't know why anyone would think differently. If the cap does rise again over the next 2 years, then it would make even more sense to leave it where it's at now.

Even though I do think leaving it as-is would be the best decision, it would worry me as a Ravens' fan to see the QB accounting for those gigantic cap hits when he isn't among the league's best of the best.

If they push it back a few years in hopes of the cap raising (which it needs to given this trend for any franchise QB), they can bank of him taking a pay cut when it is going to hit. He is heading into his 8th year. A restructure could have this cap hit in his 12th-13th year when he is more likely to take a pay cut given his age

Flacco played chicken once and won. I'd tell them they are paying me my $28 million or good luck finding another QB. Think that there are a lot of teams that would like to have Dalton, and you know how hard getting a QB can be.

I can see them doing an extension to evenly spead out the cap hit but with the extension it will still be at or about $20M/yr.

Ozzie's a genius because average Joe's contract finally resembles average a few years after he signed it because of the actions of other teams. Killer thread.

(06-02-2015, 07:14 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000495161/article/cam-newton-panthers-reach-1038m-extension

Cam Newton becomes the latest QB to join the $20m club. With Tannehill at $19 and Matt Ryan over $20, we can't help but be amazed at what a great deal the Ravens got for Flacco.

Same can be said about the Packers with Rodgers.

now i have to picture ozzie walking around the baltimore facilities acting like this guy

(06-04-2015, 05:21 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: now i have to picture ozzie walking around the baltimore facilities acting like this guy

I suppose it's better than Ozzie walking around acting like these similarly dressed guys.

(06-03-2015, 10:19 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If they push it back a few years in hopes of the cap raising (which it needs to given this trend for any franchise QB), they can bank of him taking a pay cut when it is going to hit. He is heading into his 8th year. A restructure could have this cap hit in his 12th-13th year when he is more likely to take a pay cut given his age

Problem is, Flacco is going to have to want to redo his deal, and he isn't going to do so unless the Ravens throw a lot more guaranteed money his way.  It's not like Ozzie is going to cut him.  He can play out his current deal then either force Ozzie to pay him a ridiculously high franchise tag number or negotiate another mega deal with the threat of hitting the open market.  Make no mistake, Ozzie is completely at Flacco's mercy, and Flacco holds all the cards.

(06-06-2015, 12:45 AM)Whatever Wrote: Problem is, Flacco is going to have to want to redo his deal, and he isn't going to do so unless the Ravens throw a lot more guaranteed money his way.  It's not like Ozzie is going to cut him.  He can play out his current deal then either force Ozzie to pay him a ridiculously high franchise tag number or negotiate another mega deal with the threat of hitting the open market.  Make no mistake, Ozzie is completely at Flacco's mercy, and Flacco holds all the cards.

There's a very strong belief that an adjustment after three years was a foregone conclusion during initial contract agreements anyways. 

Bottom line is that everyone saying the Ravens "have to" rework Flacco's deal this offseason is dead wrong. $28m would be a lot to carry next season, but the $14m increase from this year's number doesn't even cover all of the ridiculous $21m in dead money they're carrying this year, every dime of which will be off the books next season