LOL @ the Redskins

[Cotton]

 

[boozeman]

 

[Genghis Khan]

It'll be interesting to see how much he got considering Stephen's conniption over Amari's contract and Lamb will be coming up.

 

[Genghis Khan]

 

[Genghis Khan]

That's I think a little under 24 million per. That's not bad.

 

[Simpleton]

5 of the top 10 paid non-QB's are WR's, including now McLaurin who isn't even a top 10 WR, that market is completely out of control.

If we were run like a sane team that actually utilized FA as a tool to build the roster I'd seriously consider letting Lamb go and re-investing that money elsewhere, but Lord knows these dumb fuckers would never spend real money in FA so it's basically re-sign our own or nothing.

 

[Genghis Khan]

5 of the top 10 paid non-QB's are WR's, including now McLaurin who isn't even a top 10 WR, that market is completely out of control.

If we were run like a sane team that actually utilized FA as a tool to build the roster I'd seriously consider letting Lamb go and re-investing that money elsewhere, but Lord knows these dumb fuckers would never spend real money in FA so it's basically re-sign our own or nothing.

Agreed, because if we don't re-sign Lamb our receiving corps would definitely be Gallup, Tolbert, and a forced draft pick. Very finger crossed approach, which is our m.o. now.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

They probably won't have even a decent QB in the next three years, either. So most likely a total waste.

 

[data]

They probably won't have even a decent QB in the next three years, either.

~headswing to schmitty~

fightin’ words

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Agreed, because if we don't re-sign Lamb our receiving corps would definitely be Gallup, Tolbert, and a forced draft pick. Very finger crossed approach, which is our m.o. now.

We have control of Lamb for 3 more years. If you're not resigning him keep him 2 years and trade him going into that fifth year. The market will likely change by then though.

 

[Genghis Khan]

We have control of Lamb for 3 more years. If you're not resigning him keep him 2 years and trade him going into that fifth year. The market will likely change by then though.

Still that far away? I agree the smart move is to either re-sign him or trade him early. Unfortunately if they do trade him they'll wait until he has next to no trade value and they'll do everything in their power to kill what little value he has left.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Still that far away? I agree the smart move is to either re-sign him or trade him early. Unfortunately if they do trade him they'll wait until he has next to no trade value and they'll do everything in their power to kill what little value he has left.

I agree, we need to see what he is this year. If he shows that he is a true #1 I probably pay him. But if not I draft more receivers. Lamb is a very good receiver but he needs to show more before I pay him at the top of the position. Good news is we don't have to force anything yet.

 

[Simpleton]

We have control of Lamb for 3 more years. If you're not resigning him keep him 2 years and trade him going into that fifth year. The market will likely change by then though.

I agree that the market should be different in about 2 years.

It's a gamble, but right now teams are responding to the Rams and Bengals both building their offenses around elite WR's (Kupp/Chase), so teams that aren't paying elite QB money are trying to follow suit and paying ridiculous money plus picks for WR's (Dolphins/Eagles).

Basically I think it may be a bit of a fad based on what happened last season, if a team who jettisoned a high-profile WR (Packers/Chiefs/Ravens/Titans or even us) goes on a run next year, or even if a team like the Bills who haven't splurged insane resources on WR's, I think the market will start to settle.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I agree that the market should be different in about 2 years.

It's a gamble, but right now teams are responding to the Rams and Bengals both building their offenses around elite WR's (Kupp/Chase), so teams that aren't paying elite QB money are trying to follow suit and paying ridiculous money plus picks for WR's (Dolphins/Eagles).

Basically I think it may be a bit of a fad based on what happened last season, if a team who jettisoned a high-profile WR (Packers/Chiefs/Ravens/Titans or even us) goes on a run next year, or even if a team like the Bills who haven't splurged insane resources on WR's, I think the market will start to settle.

I mean Diggs gets 20 something mil a year but it's going to be interesting to see how these WRs workout with lesser QBs throwing the ball.

 

[boozeman]

 

[ravidubey]

The franchise tag, especially when used against talent that is merely above-average, is overrated and often detrimental.

If you wait too long, the retarded new inflationary contracts that get signed during FA every year almost force you to play that FA on the tag, draft a replacement, re-tag one year, and release.

Better to re-sign a player headed for FA mid-season of their contract year.

 

[data]

The franchise tag, especially when used against talent that is merely above-average, is overrated and often detrimental.

LEAVE DAK ALONE!!!!

 

[boozeman]

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Schmidty is not going to be happy about this.

 

[Cotton]

Schmidty is not going to be happy about this.

Are you talking about @Smitty?