Quote
jemach
But let's say for him to get Russell Wilson type money would be...well...stupid.
If he demands that, let him play out his 5th year...franchise tag him. He's not Donald worthy in terms of treatment IMO.
I expect him to get his market value...but it ain't no top of the list money.
Russell Wilson's current deal is not a 2nd contract. It has nothing to do with the 2nd contract amount for starting qbs in 2019.
When RW did sign a 2nd contract in 2015 he got the going market amount.
EVERY starting qb up for a 2nd contract since RW got his signed for more. Why? 2nd contracts for starters go up annually. Wilson in 2015 was 22 M; Carr in 2017 was 25 M. That's just how it works.
The kinds of considerations you are bringing to this are simply not relevant. You're not accounting for the most important thing in this, which is how 2nd contracts work for starters.
You want to keep a starter who is up for a 2nd contract, you sign him for that year's 2nd contract amount (or in the very close vicinity). If not, you don't sign him. It is honestly that simple. That's the reality.
And people went through this in the Donald debate. A starting player with a "name" (including all starter-caliber qbs) does not have to abide by a franchise tag. If he sits out the team owes the franchise tag amount against the cap anyway. If he demands a trade odds are good he gets traded. It's not worth the hassle for the team.
Essentially if the Rams do not offer more or less the set amount for 2nd contracts for starting qbs, they are announcing that they do not believe he is starter quality. If they do that, then, there's no point in keeping him.
Under the CBA, only one qb out of all of them was tagged at 2nd contract time--and that's Cousins. It was basically the same as the team saying they were ambivalent about keeping him.
As a rule things work the way they work, they don't follow the guidelines we armchair GMs try to get them to follow.
...
...
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2019 10:33AM by zn.
