Jump to content
49erurtaza

Matt Ryan and Falcons agree to contract extension first 30 million a year QB

Recommended Posts

Just now, diamondbull424 said:

I would’ve traded him for a top 3 pick. Let Cleveland sign him to such a deal and take a young QB on a rookie deal... and then when that QB wants a ridiculous payday of the sort... trade him too for a top 3 pick.??‍♀️

CLE NYG NYJ DEN weren’t even considering trading for a 30M QB (DEN pre-Keenum).  

It’s one thing to pay that $ it’s another to deal for one with real draft assets.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Bet Rodgers get north of $120 million guaranteed. Wont guess on the total value.

Edited by ILoveTheVikings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

CLE NYG NYJ DEN weren’t even considering trading for a 30M QB (DEN pre-Keenum).  

It’s one thing to pay that $ it’s another to deal for one with real draft assets.  

Most also assumed that Cleveland wasn’t REALLY considering Baker Mayfield either, until they were.

Given the opportunity to shore up their QB position with a seasoned vet, they might strong consider it. We have no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Most also assumed that Cleveland wasn’t REALLY considering Baker Mayfield either, until they were.

Given the opportunity to shore up their QB position with a seasoned vet, they might strong consider it. We have no idea.

Actually we do know - since the 2011 CBA, there have been only 2 trades for QB's that involved 1st round draft picks - Carson Palmer CIN to OAK, and Bradford to MIN, both for #17 picks.   And those 2 trades are widely panned as awful value, MIN's mitigated by their unique position as a contender who lost Teddy B the week before the season began, and no other alternatives in FA, and a team that really thought they could go far into the playoffs.    And still recognized as a huge overpay.

Now why only those 2 trades for 1st rounders, and why am I saying after 2011?  Simple answer - that's when the rookie salary cap became incredibly friendly for teams to cost-control 1st round rookies (and rookies in general).  And why a franchise QB on his rookie deal became such a weapon in team construction.     Meanwhile, while we haven't seen anyone give up a 1st rounder in the top 15 to get QB's - we've seen 5 trade to move up into the top 15 for rookie QB's (RGIII, Goff, Wentz, Watson & Mahomes) - and I'm not counting the 1-pick move-up by CHI last year, or the move from #15 to #10 for Josh Rosen, and the move from #12 to #7 for Josh Allen.   

The statement that we have no idea isn't borne out by the post-2011 trades after the salary cap made elite rookie contract QB’s the Holy Grail.  Those clearly show that if anything, teams want to trade for the cheap, potential franchise QB on their rookie contract.   And not the costly, uber-expensive franchise QB.    It's not even a debate. 

Edited by Broncofan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Striking gold on a young QB like the Eagles and Seahawks did with Wentz and Russell really creates a Super Bowl window of opportunity for teams until the QBs strike gold themselves on their second contracts. 

The Eagles will be paying just under $17m next season for both Wentz and Foles combined. And of course the money they’ve saved allows them to bring in a few extra quality veterans to patch up any holes on the roster. Wilson was earning peanuts as a 3rd pick on a rookie contract when Seattle won one (and should’ve been two) titles. 

You can see it with the Rams also with Goff’s contract, which helps gives them enough room to bring in veterans like Cooks, Suh, Talib and Peters. Both the Rams and Eagles have their QBs under “cheap” contracts for another two years so really no surprise seeing the moves the Rams have made this offseason. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

Whew, makes the Bortles deal look like an absolute steal.

Until you realize the massive difference in QB play between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

Until you realize the massive difference in QB play between the two.

Not really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

35 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Actually we do know - since the 2011 CBA, there have been only 2 trades for QB's that involved 1st round draft picks - Carson Palmer CIN to OAK, and Bradford to MIN, both for #17 picks.   And those 2 trades are widely panned as awful value, MIN's mitigated by their unique position as a contender who lost Teddy B the week before the season began, and no other alternatives in FA, and a team that really thought they could go far into the playoffs.    And still recognized as a huge overpay.

Now why only those 2 trades for 1st rounders, and why am I saying after 2011?  Simple answer - that's when the rookie salary cap became incredibly friendly for teams to cost-control 1st round rookies (and rookies in general).  And why a franchise QB on his rookie deal became such a weapon in team construction.     Meanwhile, while we haven't seen anyone give up a 1st rounder in the top 15 to get QB's - we've seen 5 trade to move up into the top 15 for rookie QB's (RGIII, Goff, Wentz, Watson & Mahomes) - and I'm not counting the 1-pick move-up by CHI last year, or the move from #15 to #10 for Josh Rosen, and the move from #12 to #7 for Josh Allen.   

The statement that we have no idea isn't borne out by the post-2011 trades after the salary cap made elite rookie contract QB’s the Holy Grail.  Those clearly show that if anything, teams want to trade for the cheap, potential franchise QB on their rookie contract.   And not the costly, uber-expensive franchise QB.    It's not even a debate. 

1. So you say we have no examples, yet go on to mention two non-franchise QBs that were traded for mid first round picks. Sam Bradford being not even close to a franchise QB.

Matt Ryan is a franchise QB, thus again, him going for a top 3 pick IF the Falcons sought to trade him is most certainly not out of the question. I quess Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers also wouldn’t go for the top pick in the draft either... because, you know, going for the unproven QB is always the better deal.

2. I think you’re missing the fact that realism is being thrown out the door regardless, because no franchise would go through with my plan in the first place. They’re not going to trade their franchise QB for an unproven commodity. That’s the real reason this has never happened.

3. But I would take the unproven commodity in a good QB draft over the certainty of guaranteeing a player $100m. The NBA messed up when they allowed non-elite players to make those demands. Now the NFL is making the same mistake. At least the NBA has a player max, the NFL needs to negotiate one quick as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

Whew, makes the Bortles deal look like an absolute steal.

Lol. And I thought I was pushing it by saying something similar about Smith earlier in the thread. Nah, I’m good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ILoveTheVikings said:

Bet Rodgers get north of $120 million guaranteed. Wont guess on the total value.

The common guess is 4 years at 120 million$, all of it being guaranteed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, diamondbull424 said:

 

I think you’re missing the fact that realism is being thrown out the door regardless, because no franchise would go through with my plan in the first place.

You've got the right statement, but the wrong side - the team with the top 3 pick is the one that hangs up.  There are have no examples of a top 15 pick being traded for any QB, let alone a 30M QB.     You keep making statements that have only been shown the opposite since the 2011 CBA came into place.    

Teams want the cheap cost controlled QB if they are spending a top 10 pick, let alone a top 3 pick.  There are plenty of examples of this - you're just choosing to keep your belief system despite the overwhelming evidence that shows rookie deals are what teams go after.  That's ok, we don't have to agree - but your position isn't supported but in fact contradicted by the post-2011 cap reality of rookie contract values.   I know which side I'll stick on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

 I quess Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers also wouldn’t go for the top pick in the draft either... because, you know, going for the unproven QB is always the better deal.

Tom Brady at 30M wouldn't.   Tom Brady when he was 15M or less per year, multiple years?   Of course.   But again, it's Matt Ryan at 30M.   The lowest of the franchise QB's, at the highest value.   At least in your reality, we know strawman arguments exist.     

We have teams making 8 trades to move up into the top 15 to get the rookie QB and cost-controlled contract, and no trades for a top 15 pick since the CBA.   All by different teams, and 7 of those 8 in the last 2 years.     We can choose to disagree, that's fine - but you only have strawman arguments and opinion pieces.  I'll go with the hard data, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He isn’t worth that. At what point do teams just trade their QBs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×