Contract Question

[CalvinSmoke]

Ok, deal with me. I just had a kid yestersy so I'm running on fumes lol, but after reading an article today regarding Joe Flacco being taken to the negotiation table to lower his cap hit. This stuff irks me, why did we offer a contract that escalates this high if we never intended to lay him. Same for a lot of players that balled out the hear before (Boldin, Ngata) they earned their Pay their only crime is signing a contract that was offered to them.

I'm just hoping someone has more knowledge on the contract negotions than I do. Because from my standpoint it just looks like bad business (every team does it)

[Moderator 3]

One consideration is that contracts can now only be just so long. They can be extended, but you can't do a 10 year contract to spread out the cap hit. Agents want huge dollars to be reported to boost their cred, so contracts get back-loaded.

[The Mom Gene]

Ok, deal with me. I just had a kid yestersy so I'm running on fumes lol, but after reading an article today regarding Joe Flacco being taken to the negotiation table to lower his cap hit. This stuff irks me, why did we offer a contract that escalates this high if we never intended to lay him. Same for a lot of players that balled out the hear before (Boldin, Ngata) they earned their Pay their only crime is signing a contract that was offered to them.

I'm just hoping someone has more knowledge on the contract negotions than I do. Because from my standpoint it just looks like bad business (every team does it)

Congrats on the new "kid".... 

[CalvinSmoke]

Congrats on the new "kid"....

lol "baby" but thank you

[The Mom Gene]

lol "baby" but thank you

I was messing with you...  as a Mom....  You know I had to do that..... 

Really...  Congratulations Smoke.  Happy for you.  They are a blessing.

[K-Dog]

Congratulations.

[berad]

Congrats on the baby, Calvin!

Judging from our FO's and Flaccos' agents quotes when they signed the deal, they knew it would be revisited around now. Like Mod 3 said, contracts can only be so long. Also, does ballooning it later offer the FO some insurance? Say we have a Dennis Pitta situation - we lose money if we cut him this year but after that his dead money is less than his cap hit, making it easier to cut him. Same can be said for another player that falls off because of injury issues, a back-loaded deal (where we try to pay off as much guaranteed money as possible early), gives us more flexibility later.

Maybe I'm totally off on that reasoning, though.

[Tru11]

its not so much that we offer it but its more what the player asked for and what the market demands at that point.

 

also congratz.

[BmoreBird22]

Some of it, I would imagine, has to do with routine business practice. A player like Ngata did not deserve to have a $16M cap hit, but at the same time, the front office had to know there was going to be a drop off in play to a degree as Ngata got older. It almost begs the question: why not front load to make it easier to cut later or just outright keep?

I'd imagine teams want to front load contracts, but it would take blowing up the team to do this, which a successful team like the Ravens won't do

[Static]

 You guys are oversimplifying a very complicated process.

[BmoreBird22]

I'm also wondering why there haven't been more contracts like Russel's possible upcoming contract. Why not offer more guaranteed money at the promise of a lower cap hit? It would make the player harder to cut, I believe, but it would keep the cap hit possibly low enough that you don't even have to cut that player.

And, congratulations on the child

[The Raven]

Some of it, I would imagine, has to do with routine business practice. A player like Ngata did not deserve to have a $16M cap hit, but at the same time, the front office had to know there was going to be a drop off in play to a degree as Ngata got older. It almost begs the question: why not front load to make it easier to cut later or just outright keep?

I'd imagine teams want to front load contracts, but it would take blowing up the team to do this, which a successful team like the Ravens won't do

 

Would it really require blowing up the team, if contracts are consistently front loaded? I'm not sure of that. I do wonder why so many contracts are backloaded. I guess they're just easier to restructure.

[berad]

You guys are oversimplifying a very complicated process.

This is absolutely true, too. I won't pretend to have more than an amateur knowledge of the NFL salary cap and contract workings.

[BmoreBird22]

Would it really require blowing up the team, if contracts are consistently front loaded? I'm not sure of that. I do wonder why so many contracts are backloaded. I guess they're just easier to restructure.

Well, I think it would if you're like the Ravens and consistently so close to the cap limit every year. When you've only got $15M to spend in cap, it doesn't make too much sense to get a big cap hit out of the way in year one. I don't know if it'd be a good practice for year two and three if it's a five or six year deal, but I do think it's tough if you're like the Ravens.

now, if you're like the Raiders and Jags and have like $60M to spend, I think it's very doable

[ravensnick]

Ok, deal with me. I just had a kid yestersy so I'm running on fumes lol, but after reading an article today regarding Joe Flacco being taken to the negotiation table to lower his cap hit. This stuff irks me, why did we offer a contract that escalates this high if we never intended to lay him. Same for a lot of players that balled out the hear before (Boldin, Ngata) they earned their Pay their only crime is signing a contract that was offered to them.

I'm just hoping someone has more knowledge on the contract negotions than I do. Because from my standpoint it just looks like bad business (every team does it)

Joe's agent even admitted it was a 3 year deal. The athletes don't care about the big lofty numbers so much as they care the guaranteed money. The big cap hits in the final three years are motivation for the FO to redo a deal with Flacco that's like brady's and manning's with a ton of guaranteed money. So basically, to simply  put this, it's really like a 7-10 yearish deal that get restructured in year 3. But, no one in their right mind would offer a 7-10 year contract because potential injuries/play drop off. 

[CalvinSmoke]

Joe's agent even admitted it was a 3 year deal. The athletes don't care about the big lofty numbers so much as they care the guaranteed money. The big cap hits in the final three years are motivation for the FO to redo a deal with Flacco that's like brady's and manning's with a ton of guaranteed money. So basically, to simply put this, it's really like a 7-10 yearish deal that get restructured in year 3. But, no one in their right mind would offer a 7-10 year contract because potential injuries/play drop off.

ok, this makes sense to me. And since its near the end of the contract, if they are better off cutting the guy it won't hurt them as badly. Im still not a huge fan of it but it makes sense from a business standpoint

[ludy51]

It was really only a 3 year deal anyway. So the back loaded money was pretty much known to not be paid out.

[rmcjacket23]

One key thing to remember...

 

Cap hit and the amount the player actually gets paid are rarely the exact same thing, and in Joe's case, they aren't even close.

 

Joe has made (after 2015) $62M in the first three years of his deal, which is a little over half his contracts value. So from Joe's perspective, the contract isn't "backloaded" at all. Its actually slightly frontloaded.

 

From the teams perspective, they kept the first three years on a reasonable salary cap, because essentially most of Joe's base salaries after the first two years were non-guaranteed. The overwhelming majority of his guaranteed money was in the form of 3 different bonuses.

 

So Joe's been getting paid very well, and the team has had a low cap number. Since there are no more bonuses left to be paid on Joe's deal, and he technically has no more guaranteed money, he could theoretically risk being released (obviously not realistic) if he hadn't performed at a level high enough to warrant his cap hit.

 

So renegotiating an extension, from both parties perspective, makes perfect sense. Joe can get more money up front and sooner on an extension, and the team can spread his cap hit out more evenly over a longer period of time.

[cwfRaven]

One key thing to remember...

Cap hit and the amount the player actually gets paid are rarely the exact same thing, and in Joe's case, they aren't even close.

Joe has made (after 2015) $62M in the first three years of his deal, which is a little over half his contracts value. So from Joe's perspective, the contract isn't "backloaded" at all. Its actually slightly frontloaded.

From the teams perspective, they kept the first three years on a reasonable salary cap, because essentially most of Joe's base salaries after the first two years were non-guaranteed. The overwhelming majority of his guaranteed money was in the form of 3 different bonuses.

So Joe's been getting paid very well, and the team has had a low cap number. Since there are no more bonuses left to be paid on Joe's deal, and he technically has no more guaranteed money, he could theoretically risk being released (obviously not realistic) if he hadn't performed at a level high enough to warrant his cap hit.

So renegotiating an extension, from both parties perspective, makes perfect sense. Joe can get more money up front and sooner on an extension, and the team can spread his cap hit out more evenly over a longer period of time.

Very clearly and simply put! Thanks!

[ravensfan520]

One key thing to remember...

Cap hit and the amount the player actually gets paid are rarely the exact same thing, and in Joe's case, they aren't even close.

Joe has made (after 2015) $62M in the first three years of his deal, which is a little over half his contracts value. So from Joe's perspective, the contract isn't "backloaded" at all. Its actually slightly frontloaded.

From the teams perspective, they kept the first three years on a reasonable salary cap, because essentially most of Joe's base salaries after the first two years were non-guaranteed. The overwhelming majority of his guaranteed money was in the form of 3 different bonuses.

So Joe's been getting paid very well, and the team has had a low cap number. Since there are no more bonuses left to be paid on Joe's deal, and he technically has no more guaranteed money, he could theoretically risk being released (obviously not realistic) if he hadn't performed at a level high enough to warrant his cap hit.

So renegotiating an extension, from both parties perspective, makes perfect sense. Joe can get more money up front and sooner on an extension, and the team can spread his cap hit out more evenly over a longer period of time.

Now here's the big question... what if he and Ravens can't agree on an extension and Joe tries to play out his deal or wants something to extreme... will we cut him. Not saying he would... don't know Joe personally or his agent but stranger things have happened.. take Ngata for instance... He thought what the Ravens were offering wasn't what he could get on the market if cut... the same can be said about a qb... He holds the chips... and I would hate to miss out on our other free agents if his negotiations take to long and we can't extend them now (Jimmy Yanda Tucker and I personally like Upshaw hope he resigns.)

Which leads me to ask the next question... Bisciotti has come out and said he prefers to have an elite defense and we did sign Schuab for this year but could revisit that again... was that a precursor to moving back to defense and having a serviceable qb now that our running game is back and speculation that we may add another rb in the draft...

[Tru11]

Now here's the big question... what if he and Ravens can't agree on an extension and Joe tries to play out his deal or wants something to extreme... will we cut him. Not saying he would... don't know Joe personally or his agent but stranger things have happened.. take Ngata for instance... He thought what the Ravens were offering wasn't what he could get on the market if cut... the same can be said about a qb... He holds the chips... and I would hate to miss out on our other free agents if his negotiations take to long and we can't extend them now (Jimmy Yanda Tucker and I personally like Upshaw hope he resigns.)

 

they wont cut him and if they would it going to be a post june 1 cut in 2016 at the soonest.

 

chances he plays out 2016 at his current number and if things really dont work out he gets traded in 2017.

 

really would depend on our cap situation in 2017 though as i actually see them keeping flacco even at that cap number unless his play takes a major decline.

[rmcjacket23]

Now here's the big question... what if he and Ravens can't agree on an extension and Joe tries to play out his deal or wants something to extreme... will we cut him. Not saying he would... don't know Joe personally or his agent but stranger things have happened.. take Ngata for instance... He thought what the Ravens were offering wasn't what he could get on the market if cut... the same can be said about a qb... He holds the chips... and I would hate to miss out on our other free agents if his negotiations take to long and we can't extend them now (Jimmy Yanda Tucker and I personally like Upshaw hope he resigns.)

Which leads me to ask the next question... Bisciotti has come out and said he prefers to have an elite defense and we did sign Schuab for this year but could revisit that again... was that a precursor to moving back to defense and having a serviceable qb now that our running game is back and speculation that we may add another rb in the draft...

Short answer... no.

 

Long answer... we aren't cutting Joe in 2016. That's only $2.7M in cap space savings with $25.85M in dead money. So we are at least two years away from even entertaining that as a possibility from a salary cap perspective.

 

From Joe's perspective, he very well may decide to play out 2016 as is, and I think the FO considers that a possibility anyway. What I think Joe and Joe's agent knows is that Joe also isn't a "statistical QB" like guys like Rodgers or Brees, and he's likely never to be. Thus, if Joe is going to be taking up 20% of the teams overall cap space, the team itself from a personnel perspective may very well suffer. It could lead to Joe having "off" seasons, perhaps as a reflection of the team's lack of committment to commit considerable cap space to offensive positions, since Joe would be taking up nearly $30M in cap space there. Could mean a lack of weapons to throw to, etc.

 

As such, that would reflect negatively upon Joe and his open market value should he and the Ravens decide to part ways. I think Joe and Joe's agent understand that.

 

As for Schaub, he's 100% irrelevant to this discussion in my opinion. Schaub isn't even a functional game manager at this stage in his career... he's strictly backup material that would likely struggle to win games in ANY starting role, regardless of quality around him. He will be 34 by the time the season starts, and he's realistically got maybe 1-2 more years as a backup QB left in his NFL career, so he probably be retired by the time we would even entertain moving on from Joe anyway.

 

There's a zero percent chance the Ravens even consider Schaub as an option at QB if they were to part ways with Joe for some reason. If that happened, we would be quickly and aggressively going to the draft for another QB.

 

Ultimately, this is all a moot point for me, because I fully expect that by the start of the 2017 season, Joe will have signed an extension with this team and will be their QB for easily the rest of this decade in my opinion.

[January J]

They will get an extension done, joe is not hard headed or greedy, and either way we would make it work. Biscotti has already said even if they do not reach an agreement they are fully prepared to have flacco play in 2016 under that current number. Obviously that is not the preference but cutting or trading joe wouldn't be an option. Unless he has an absolutely abysmal year and somehow falls off and throws 25+ interceptions , I just don't see it happening. However I can see him finally breaking 4000 k and throwing for well over 30 Tds. Joe will be a raven for years to come unless he basically breaks his neck.