rmcjacket23

WHY? We couldn't afford them after 4 years. Yes we could. Plenty of evidence to suggest we will and can. In particular first rounders. If you're a good player for us, and you're a first round pick, you'll get a second contract from us. Its pretty much a foregone conclusion.

And what happens if Claiborne doesn't put it together? Would be interested for somebody came up with a list of the types of players who were average to below average players (which Claiborne has been) for the first 4-5 years of their career and then all of the sudden "put it together"? I don't think that list is going to be very long. I would argue that durability at Corner is actually more important to this team at the moment than actual quality of play. You can take risks on young corners who can "put it together" in the draft... especially in the middle rounds. Paying a guy $4-5M a year or more in FA isn't exactly the time when you start throwing darts at players hoping they pay off. Carr isn't a great corner. But he's a durable one who you can typically count on to be out there. I'd rather have the average to above average corner at 16 games a year than the great corner at 8-10 games a year. The former is going to return move value every single time.

Not the point though. From where I'm sitting, you're likely to get at least a 4th round comp pick for Jernigan, and possibly a 3rd if he fetches a big enough contract, which he likely will. Knowing that, I'm not trading him for a pick that's in the same round of the comp pick I'm getting back. If we think we can get a 3rd from him in two years, I'm not trading him for a 3rd today. While the comp pick will be later in the round, I'm not cutting Jernigan's tenure a year short just to move up a few picks in the 3rd round. If it were the 1st round or maybe the 2nd, I'd certainly consider it. But there's not a whole lot of difference in the available talent pool between a guy picked in the 70s-80s of the draft and a guy picked in the 90s. That's my point. I'm not trading the guy for a pick in a round that is lower than the comp pick I would expect to get. Ultimately I think all of this discussion is moot. I think a lot of this is floated by the media who just speculate. They speculate that we won't be resigning him after his deal is done (which we likely won't), and that means that we should or would consider trading him prior to that. Those kinds of deals don't happen very frequently in the NFL. The Patriots are basically the only team that does this with any sort of frequency, and they don't even do it as often as people think.

Could be meeting with him in case he is available on day 2. Returners obviously aren't really that important in an era would kickoffs start at the 25, and he'd be just another speed receiver to add to a list of receivers that we already have. We're looking for a complementary receiver who can move the chains on 3rd down. I don't see anything from Ross to indicate he's that guy. Doesn't fit the mold of the type of receiver we already said we are looking for.

I would be surprised very much if we are even considering using a 1st round pick on Ross.

Well, we have a shortage of "established" receivers, meaning receivers that we know for certain are good. We know we've got a bunch of young guys that need to develop at both WR and TE, and I suspect that will continue. Adding another draft pick or two will only amplify this, not fix it.

I think it takes a lot of work and effort to intentionally make yourself look like you're an idiot just for the joy of thinking you're actually fooling anybody. Six months ago he was forming coherent thoughts in actually readable sentences or phrases. Its trolling 101.

1. Nothing is guaranteed. 2. You don't need drastic changes to see a radical difference in production and output. Where were the radical changes the Falcons made between 2015 and 2016? Or the Patriots, who rarely make radical changes year over year?

Well and 2014, by far the best year of his career.

We don't really have any bad contracts anymore. That's a very 2014-2015 type thinking.

Cool, because his salary is $6M this year, so he's well below that. Now all we have to work on is getting fans to actually understand what they're talking about in terms of the salary cap, and everything will be fine. There's a large learning curve that needs to happen there, and it needs to happen fast. And FYI, Eli's cap hit is $19.7M for 2017, and was $24.2M last season. Eli actually made $18M last season, but that's certainly not what his cap number is, because they're not the same. I guess you missed the part where he made $37M the year before.

Actually, Goodell already told us that they are looking into and almost certainly will be "cutting commercials"... in a sense. Most likely you'll see less commercials, but just longer one's of the one's you do see. Obviously doesn't make sense for the NFL to cut commercials entirely or reduce the amount of them without some sort of benefit on the other end. Commercials are how the NFL makes the majority of their money.

Joe's contract has more to do with you sitting at home watching games on TV in your Ravens jersey eating bons bons than it does about ticket pricing or in-stadium beverage sales. Them cutting the price of beer or even tickets with only lead to Joe and every other QBs contract size to grow, not shrink. Do you guys still not understand how the NFL makes money?

1. You're pretty much the only person I know who thinks Lewis didn't show promise at LG. Frankly, when he played and actually played LG, I thought he was easily one of the better lineman on the field. He got moved around a decent amount and got injured, but was pretty clear to me that he did a better job at LG than LT. Obviously LT is a harder position to play, but I didn't like his athleticism at T at all, and I think he sticks at LG. 2. We know nothing about the draft class and how good any group of positions are in it. All this talk about strong positions and weak positions is purely based on what some mock draft analyst says... of which they whiff a TON on perceptions vs realities. There's entire websites devoted to showing how awful some of these NFL teams would be if they drafted the players that some of your more popular "analysts" thought they should have drafted. On an annual basis, there's a position or even group of positions that's perceived as "weak", and yet, that group or position churns out several high quality NFL players. In particular, when it comes to discussing drafting an interior lineman or even a RT, we're probably not discussing that in the first round anyway, and there isn't a person I know who's done enough research on mid-round prospects to have any vague clue as to whether they will be good players or not. I'm far more worried about finding a Center then I am about finding a RT. You can have a below average RT and still have a very good offensive line, because the line is five players working together, not a bunch of good individual players. Most of the good offensive lines throughout the league, save for maybe the Cowboys or Raiders, have one or two very good lineman and the rest are average to slightly above average at best.

I apologize on behalf of my tax dollars that helped to fund the public education system.

I think there is where your perception of what our needs were was misguided. One key thing I'm seeing on this board that has recently become popular... fans aren't listening to what the FO tells them. Too many fans think the FO is being deceptive or lying to everybody. They're not. The FO told you that they wanted to add multiple corners. They added Carr, and are fully expected to add one in the draft. They told you they wanted to get younger at Safety. Hello Tony Jefferson, goodbye Webb. Other things they said... beef up the Offensive line. We kind of knew this wasn't something that was likely to happen in FA, because we knew we needed a Center and a RT. Neither position yielded much in FA whatsoever, and we knew that going in. Again, seems like a very strong sense of addressing this in the draft or with players already on the roster. The only position I've seen so far where I expected the FO to address in FA and didn't was WR, and that was likely due to some of the outrageous prices of possession WRs in this class. In terms of pass rushers, again, the FO already gave us a clue as to their stance... its not as important to them as it is to fans. They like some of the guys we have already, and they don't feel that its a drastic need. Will we still add one? Of course, because we do just about every year. I think its key that fans invest more time in LISTENING. These issues have been addressed publicly already, and if people listened to what they told us, a lot of their priorities have been addressed or covered already, and some of them aren't in sync with what fans think the priorities are or should be.

How exactly does adding Warford solidify an Oline that needs probably 2 new starters? I would also point out that it seems that the people driving the "Lewis at RT" bus is exclusively limited to just fans. Pretty obvious from everything I've heard from the FO at this point that they fully view Lewis as the starter at LG. I'm not even sure they're going to try him at RT until they decide nobody else in camp can play the position.

Well, except that doesn't benefit the Dolphins very much...

Are the rumors really heating up? Or is this just because John said he wouldn't mind having him back? I'm not wasting my time talking about Boldin. It'll be another 2-3 months before he even thinks about signing with ANY team.

2nd round or pick or better. Otherwise the trade doesn't really benefit us that much.

Pros and cons on both sides of this. If you're running the ball a lot and aren't effective at it, you're just wasting time and not accomplishing anything. Ravens weren't very effective at running the ball last year when they did it, so entirely possible that our defense would have been even more tired if we used this methodology. There were instances where we abandoned the run for no reason, and there were instances we abandoned the run for plenty of good reasons (lack of effectiveness, game flow and score, etc.).

If he plays lights out, you'd likely get a 3rd round comp pick for him when he walks next year anyway. I'm not interested in trading him a year early just to move up higher in the same round, especially when there's not really a talent dropoff between like early-mid 3rd round and late 3rd round. What do you mean by moving up in the same round? Wouldn't we obtain an extra pick in the round and keep our original 3rd round pick? im confused. We have our normal 3rd round pick currently. If he walks in FA, we could get a 3rd round comp pick, which would be late in the round. If we instead trade him, we would pick up another 3rd, but we would lose the ability to get that comp pick. So all we did was move up some spots. If we did the deal with somebody who ends up picking in the back half or end of the 3rd round (a contending team), then we would be trading Jernigan one year early and basically just getting a draft pick that's maybe like 5-10 spots better in the 3rd round. If it were in the first round, I'd see the value. In the 3rd, I don't.

If he plays lights out, you'd likely get a 3rd round comp pick for him when he walks next year anyway. I'm not interested in trading him a year early just to move up higher in the same round, especially when there's not really a talent dropoff between like early-mid 3rd round and late 3rd round.

If you're locking him up before the season, you're very likely already paying him what you paid Brandon Williams. Why would he take a deal less than that, when he can just wait a year and be a hot commodity?

36 players is not a low number at all. Say 8 draft picks (Jernigan, Mosley, Gilmore) that's 47. Only 4 roster spots to fill. i absolutely agree I'm also not buying into the trade talk. Just doesn't make sense at the moment. if your committing 25 mil on the 2 players then he'll no. That's like saying Jernigan will get a 15 mil per year deal. Let him walk and il gladly take another year of cheap production along with s third round comp. I'm thinking 18 mil between the two is fair if we have a top 5 defense 1. Would depend on the price of those players that are filled. If they are getting $5-7M a year contracts, that's $20-25M spent right there. 2. Well, Williams deal averages at $10.5M. The prevailing thought is that Jernigan would get similar or more, considering he's a pretty good DT who also can get to the QB. So if he got an identical deal, it means you would average $21M spent on those two guys. It wouldn't be $21M in year 1, but if its not, it means by the time you get to years like 2-4, it will be significantly higher than that. If you're getting them for $18M total on average, that means you're only willing to pay Jernigan $7.5M. If that's the case, then he will definitely be playing elsewhere, because that's probably a very lowball offer. 3. The comp pick is why I don't see him getting traded. Unless he has a disastrous season, he will fetch a price tag that will guarantee us at least a 4th rounder, and likely a 3rd, depending on how next years market shakes out. I can't see any team giving up more than a 3rd for him, so AT BEST, you'd be trading him a season early to move up in the same round in the draft. To me, that's not worth it. I'm not dealing him unless I can get a 2nd rounder for sure, and if its a late 2nd rounder, I'm not even sure I do that.