Warfish

I'd say he's current between ~8-12. Based on 2022. If he rebounds from a down year and injury, he's top 10 again. If he doesn''t, he's middle of the pack or worse.

A sting is a short drum sequence played by a drummer to punctuate a joke, especially an obvious one. 🥁

Oh, is it? So I guess then that Green Bay really DOES have all the leverage in the Rodgers trade deal then, since it's just cap money that's the issue if the have to retain him, and that is "very navigable". Good to know.

Aye. the Scots have a similar phrase, I just cannot remember it. Something Jock I think.

You've won me over JiF, I think this is EXACTLY what Lamar should do. I support your idea 100%.

Lol, no skin off my back. I'm happy to let the community decide which of us has made a more reasonable/logical argument on this one.

Dan Synder is. Been reported here regularly as part of his sale of the team. So much so he had to get loans to cover the bills, loans in violation of his ownership agreements with his minority owners. It's pretty well known here in DC that Snyder is cash-poor (at least till the sale goes through). Not every owner is like a Jeff Bezos mate, everything is relative. But Snyder and the 'Ders have another reason for not chasing Jackson (despite on paper him being a huge upgrade to Howell): The sale of the team. Snyder isn't going to sign a deal like Jackson wants for as long as he wants when the team is literally about to be sold. And as there is no winning bidder yet, no one external is telling Snyder what to do (that just doesn't happen tbqh). So there you go, a team that in theory would want Jackson, perhaps, but has two clear-cut reasons why they won't, without any need of collusion. Look, you want to ignore reality and go full tin foil, be my guest.

A Guinness, a Middleton Very Rare or three, a Redbreast, a Green Spot, oh aye, I enjoyed the full fruits of my heritages alcoholic production! Food was great too, honestly, several amazing places in Dublin. But aye, it was pretty much cool, overcast and drizzly all week. But I expected that honestly.

Well, lets engage in some critical thinking, shall we? 1. Teams/Owners who already have Franchise QB's under contract. These teams/GM's/Owners would have zero use, and zero to gain, "colluding" in re: Lamar Jackson. They already have QB's they love who win and produce. Jackson is not the best QB in the NFL. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for someone they don't need? 2. Teams/Owners who are cash strapped/in salary cap hell. These teams/GM's/Owners cannot afford Lamar Jackson. For whatever reason, they're already either cash strapped (like the Commanders soon to be outbound Owner) or more likely, are simply salary cap strapped and unable to work the cap enough to afford a top-end cost like Jackson. They may like him, but they simply cannot afford him. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for someone they can't afford? 3. Teams/Owners who are risk averse. These teams/GM's/owners are on the more risk-averse side of the league, call the conservative (with a little "c'). They do not take big risks, they prefer more stable, safe investments. This includes both players and systems. They see Jackson as risky due to his play style and his recent injury history. They also see themselves having to change alot on their team, including possibly coaches and offensive coordinators, to make Jackson work for them. They may not have the best QB, but they find the risk of Jackson too high. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for someone they think is too risky? 4. Teams/Owners who are cheap. Different than #2 above, some NFL Owners are simply cheap. They don't tend to spend to the full cap, they don't tend to give out huge contracts to Free Agents, they certainly aren't giving out huge long-term guaranteed contracts. They are either milking their team for profit, or are simply (again) conservative as business owners. They're not interested in Lamar because thats not the kind of move they make, they'd rather draft a cheap guy. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for someone they think is too expensive? 5. Teams/Owners who prefer to build through the Draft. These teams/owners don't chance high-end Free Agents most years, they believe in building through the NFL Draft, finding and developing their own talent, not looking for the savior or quick fix via free agency. Patriots, Steelers are two examples, generally/historically. These teams might like Lamar, or want him out of their division, but they're not going to give up two #1 picks (like gold to these teams) and a huge deal for a quick fix, especially a risky quick fix like Jackson. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for someone that doesn't align with their team building philosophy? 6. Teams/Owners who adamantly do not believe in giving Guaranteed contracts. Self-explanatory, these teams/GM's hate the Cleveland deal given to Watson, think it's bad for the league (esp. looking ta baseball and the NBA) and simply won't be interested on that aspect alone. Irsay's quote pretty well exemplifies this view, which I believe is pretty commonly held around the league, without need for collusion. It's pretty obvious from an Ownership perspective why. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for a type of contract they oppose existing or growing in common use? 7. Teams/Owners who think the Ravens will simply match any reasonable deal they might offer. Despite what fans think, not everything can be solved by contract poison pills. Some teams have outright said they're not going to do the Ravens work for them, given the Ravens have the right to match any deal. Anything reasonable they offer could be matched by the Ravens, so why waste time when the offseason is busy and short and there is a lot of other players to pursue and a draft to prepare for? With only so many front office staff available, and time an issue, they may simply not want to waste their time, i.e. opportunity cost, pursuing Jackson. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for a player they feel confident the Ravens want to keep and will match, possibly costing them shots at other players they want to sign? 8. Teams/Owners who don't like/want Run-first QB's. As much as we might want to think every NFL team is on the cutting edge of offensive systems, they're not, there are several out there who still don't believe in the concept of the "running QB" as the route to success. These teams prefer more traditional pocket-passer type QB's who produce passing yards, not rushing yards. They believe RB's can provide running production at a much reduced cost (and risk!) and plan and manage a far more traditional type of offense. They're not interested in changing system, designing rosters around a single player like a running QB, or risking it all falling apart if that QB gets hurt. Far easier to find a thrower they believe in. So why would these teams and owners collude, knowing the legal risks, for a type of player game-play style they don't believe in? 9. Teams/Owners who don't want to negotiate with Jackson without an Agent Representing him. Self-explanatory, Jackson is not an agent and doesn't have one, which is a big part of his problems in some of our views. Teams may be averse to trying to negotiate directly with a player, given how contentious that could be, and how sensitive Jackson clearly is about his health, his worth, his value, etc. Having agents takes that issue out of play, but it's very in-play with Jackson. Some teams may simply want to avoid that, especially if they already have any of the 8 reasons above limiting their interest. There is more, but you get the point I'm sure. If you eliminate any team with any of these possible reasons, how many teams are left to "collude" exactly? You would have to believe that no one in the NFL could independently reach any of these conclusions/viewpoints on their own to believe the league, as a collective whole, must be colluding to keep Jackson unsigned. You'd have to reject every one of these very reasonable possible reasons for teams to not chase Jackson, in order to believe only collusion (or racism, as certain others have suggested) is the likely cause for the lack of interest other than the Ravens themselves. Personally, I find that idea laughable. There are many reasons a team would avoid Jackson that do not require any conversations or collusion to reach. Hell, many of us fans reached those same conclusions without having to "collude" with other fans, lol. Fans who only see collusion here are simply ignoring a huge amount of reasons why Jackson isn't as great or as easy or as sure-thing as they think he is. Those fans decision to ignore reality doesn't make collusion likely.

That should be an amazing trip, I wish you the very best of times my friend! Take pictures! Here is one from my recent trip to Ireland (just got back actually):

Tasty, tasty tears, bring me more, I want to bathe in them!

As a fellow foodie, I am truly sorry my friend. That would make me rather grumpy as well, at minimum. Best wishes to a maximum recovery/treatment for it, maybe one day you can return to the good eat'in club. I truly hope you get the opportunity. Rome and the Amalfi Coast was one of the best trips/times in my life. My wife was right all along, screw buying "stuff", spend all your money on travel and experiences! You can't take it with you, after all.

As a side note, I thought the low opinions of actual Italians in Italy on their Italian-American cousins was pretty funny when I was in Rome last time. Suffice to say they don't hold them in terribly high regard, especially and specifically on a culinarily basis, lol. In fairness, actual Irish people hold "Irish-Americans", most of whom are now 4th or 5th generations way from Ireland, in equally low regard. I just got back from Dublin, some funny conversation were had on that front, lol. Seems like a theme, Europeans don't quite understand why so many Americans are so obsessed with where their great, great, great, great grandparents were from, and why American call themselves "X-Americans" when they're really just Americans at that point. With that said, they're quite happy to take our tourist money, lol, so there is that too.

No one is acting in solidarity with their rivals. No one is colluding. There are no black helicopters over your house, the 2020 election wasn't stolen, contrails aren't chemtrails, and aliens aren't visiting you to probe your bumhole..... Individual teams GM's (and owners) are making individual decisions on a player with no agent representing/counseling him, that his demands are unreasonable for the injury risk, the passing production, the play style, and the odds of the Ravens matching any reasonable offer they might make. Fans can whine all they want, and wear all the tin foil hats they want, this is all on Lamar Jackson. Like RGIII before him, he thinks he's bigger than the game, and worth alot more than he is. Hire an agent, get real about your compensation demands, and he'd be signed, very VERY well compensated, and done at this point.