swede700 Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 10 minutes ago, vike daddy said: which I expect we'll be... It'll be interesting to see what types of free agents they'll even be interested in (not to divert this topic too much). Would you bring in a soon to be 30-yr old Kenny Clark (should the Packers move on)? Edited June 3 by swede700 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 20 minutes ago, swede700 said: Would you bring in a soon to be 30-yr old Kenny Clark (should the Packers move on)? Probably not, given the apparent strength of next year’s draft class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 We never get crazy holdouts anymore. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted June 3 Author Share Posted June 3 Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter There were multiple teams this off-season that inquired about trading for Justin Jefferson, per league sources. The Vikings let each one of them know, in no uncertain terms, that they had zero intention of trading Jefferson and the conversations ended right then and there. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 I never once contemplated trading Jefferson. The idea was so foreign to me I refused to think about it. But since he's signed now I can think about it without any stress lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidvikingfan Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 2 hours ago, swede700 said: So how soon is it before we start talking about Darrisaw's extension? Should we wait a few days? 🤣 The Vikings more often then not don't do these until the player is in the last year of their deal so more likely Darrisaw gets his new deal next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viking Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 This Jefferson extension really ties the bow on a fantastic (in my opinion) off season. Imagine if we'd resigned Kirk and as a result of having a tighter cap we had to trade Jefferson? That would make me sick 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshpit23 Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 3 hours ago, battle2heaven said: flexibility Exactly! Flexibility is something that Kwesi talks about. I love this contract for JJets, the Viking's organization and most importantly the fans! Great day in MN Viking’s land. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted June 3 Author Share Posted June 3 Jefferson's deal pays $88.743 million fully guaranteed at signing. The practical guarantee is $95.743 million, since it can be avoided only if he’s cut after one year. It’s far more likely he’ll definitely be paid $125.743 million over four years, since $14.257 million of his year-four pay becomes fully guaranteed after only two years. (In all, $110 million is guaranteed for injury at signing.) It’s the biggest contract ever given to a non-quarterback, with no back-end fugazi numbers aimed at pumping up the new-money average. Here’s the cash flow: $38.063 million in year one $69.993 million through two years $95.743 million through three years $125.743 million through four years $159.743 million through five years. Through two years, four years, and five years, it’s the highest cash flow ever for a non-quarterback. Through three years, it’s second. Again, if he keeps playing at his current level, it surely will be replaced at some point with a new contract. For now, it’s the best contract ever given to a player who doesn’t play quarterback. https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/inside-the-justin-jefferson-deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus-Viktor Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Wow. I have mixed feelings on this. When I read 4 years 180 mill, I'm thinking 45 mill a year, when you have no proven QB. Not a fan. Now it's looking, from VD's #s, like it's ~30 mill a year, so not nearly as bad. I've always said the best way to field a decent team but not a real contender is to overpay your skills positions, like they did with Adrian Peterson who made their offense one dimensional. Unlike Adrian though, Jefferson is the total package and not one dimensional at all. He doesn't handcuff your offense and offensive coordinator at all by shutting down half of your play book. He is the play book. I personally consider JJ to be, by far, the best WR in the game. Hopefully he stays healthy, and JJ is a franchise QB. Combine that, with TJ, a good HC and DC, and an improving D, and you might have something. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted June 3 Author Share Posted June 3 14 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said: Wow. I have mixed feelings on this. When I read 4 years 180 mill, I'm thinking 45 mill a year, when you have no proven QB. Not a fan. Now it's looking, from VD's #s, like it's ~30 mill a year, so not nearly as bad. i remember when we signed Steve Hutchinson (Cousins too, for that matter...) and we all thought his salary was astronomical. and then in two years or so it was eclipsed by his peers and he was at a relative bargain. it will be the same thing here. we use to say in this forum... "Trust the Bryz." so, that's what i'm going to do... Trust the Bryz. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Relax Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 36 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said: Wow. I have mixed feelings on this. When I read 4 years 180 mill, I'm thinking 45 mill a year, when you have no proven QB. Not a fan. Now it's looking, from VD's #s, like it's ~30 mill a year, so not nearly as bad. I've always said the best way to field a decent team but not a real contender is to overpay your skills positions, like they did with Adrian Peterson who made their offense one dimensional. Unlike Adrian though, Jefferson is the total package and not one dimensional at all. He doesn't handcuff your offense and offensive coordinator at all by shutting down half of your play book. He is the play book. IIRC neither AD or his contract hampered the offense. Until Harvin and Favre arrived, he was the offense. And, why not? Nine defenders in the box tried to contain him and rarely could. Yes, he was paid well, in an era when running backs were valued in the NFL. Yet, because of his production in the offense he was a bargain. His contract didn't hinder the Vikings signing Jared Allen, Winfield, Hutchinson or Favre, nor did it hinder drafting Percy Harvin. To me, the offense was probably more hindered by Brad Childress than AD. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus-Viktor Posted June 4 Share Posted June 4 2 hours ago, Captain Relax said: IIRC neither AD or his contract hampered the offense. Until Harvin and Favre arrived, he was the offense. And, why not? Nine defenders in the box tried to contain him and rarely could. Yes, he was paid well, in an era when running backs were valued in the NFL. Yet, because of his production in the offense he was a bargain. His contract didn't hinder the Vikings signing Jared Allen, Winfield, Hutchinson or Favre, nor did it hinder drafting Percy Harvin. To me, the offense was probably more hindered by Brad Childress than AD. I always thought he hindered the offense because they had so much of the playbook they couldn't run with him in there due to his many glaring liabilities. Like Robert Smith said once, if he wanted to be able to do those things, he could. He couldn't do them because he chose not to (pass pro, routes, running out of the gun, etc, but more geared towards pass pro of course). He was just a selfish player that was a statswhore. I don't feel like getting into it that in-depth and bringing up something from a decade ago to derail this thread. I just used him as an example of how not to build a team. Hopefully this works out, but it's rare when a non-QB or pass rusher/defensive stud gets paid this much and the team can field a good, SB-caliber roster. Look at the Bills. Once Josh Allen got paid, the rest of the team fell off big time. Happens time and again. That's why the 9ers are able to sign so many stars: a Mr Irrelevant-level salary at QB. If we get the healthy Jefferson that is dominant every year, even with a likely lesser passer throwing to him, probably not a bad move. If he's dinged up a lot as he was last year, and can't produce with lesser passing? Different story. Personally, I would've traded him to move up for the only QB in this draft that I really liked, before I would've made a WR the highest paid non-QB in the league. And I say that as a big fan of him, so I have zero against him. I had him pegged as the best WR in that draft and the guy I wanted the Vikes to draft. I just don't value WR to that extent that I'd devote that much cap space to a single WR. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus-Viktor Posted June 4 Share Posted June 4 3 hours ago, vike daddy said: i remember when we signed Steve Hutchinson (Cousins too, for that matter...) and we all thought his salary was astronomical. and then in two years or so it was eclipsed by his peers and he was at a relative bargain. it will be the same thing here. we use to say in this forum... "Trust the Bryz." so, that's what i'm going to do... Trust the Bryz. Hopefully! Trusting Bryz is also what got them into cap hell where they had to gut the team in recent years though lol. That Cousins signing was atrocious in my book. 100% guaranteed. Ugh. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vike daddy Posted June 4 Author Share Posted June 4 18 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said: Hopefully! Trusting Bryz is also what got them into cap hell where they had to gut the team in recent years though lol. That Cousins signing was atrocious in my book. 100% guaranteed. Ugh. fair point. but Bryz then was following a "football guy's" direction, mainly about immediate roster composition. now he's following someone who's building an organization with long range planning and an emphasis on minimizing risks, instead of taking them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.