5 hours ago
(8 hours ago)reuben.ahmed Wrote: The weird part though is the team paying people for the past - or the future?
It's like the Flacco wins the superbowl contract to never win again.
I can see a team trying to make up for the past lower pay (especially when structured in a contract as so).
How many more years do we think he will perform at that level? I feel like the Bengals may have offered him a 1 year and he wants more (3).
It's a combination of a lot of things. Past performance, potential future performance + age + injury history. Every situation is different. Flacco was positioned perfectly to have the Ravens over a barrel. They were in a no win sitch and just had to bite the bullett cause you don't just let a SB winning QB walk away at that age (unless he's Trent Dilfer) which he's not.
Trey's performance is likely to dip soon. That's why i've been saying pay him up front and give him the years, but with outs or at a lower salary to mitigate. Who knows...with the Chase and Tee contracts not being done the way most teams do them--low early numbers--maybe they're kind of hamstrung on what they can pay Trey in yrs 1 and 2.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
"Hope is not a strategy"
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
