TBayXXXVII

I don't think he's going to be kept in my league, the guy who has him also has Burrow. Doubt he keeps both.

My league wouldn't help this argument because we start 2 QB's. We usually have 7 or 8 QB's kept and most of the first round is QB's.

Yeah, I don't them off hand, I just know that watching games, I see him say hike and he's off and running before anything happens. I'm assuming those are designed runs. I see it a only a couple times, but I'm watching Red Zone. My guess is that if I'm seeing him do it 2 or 3 times in limited viewing, it's probably happening another 2 or 3 at a minimum.

I think Jackson is talented enough to get the Ravens to the playoffs, but I think he's on borrowed time, because his best asset is his running. I do think that the Ravens would be best served to be somewhat conservative in the regular season and put the pedal to the medal in the playoffs. If he keeps getting hurt, and I know his injuries were in the pocket, he's not going to win them enough games to make the playoffs... and if by some chance they still do, he may not be the QB. Looking at the landscape of the AFC, you have 3 possible playoff teams in the AFC East, 2 other than the Ravens in the North, and 2 others in the West (3 if you count Denver). Them plus the the winner of the South puts the Ravens up against another 8 (maybe 9), legitimate contenders for 7 spots. They need him under center.

Rushing for 46 yards per game would put him at almost 800 yards. That still probably leads the league. Not sure why you think that the Ravens can't win that way. Also, if they did upgrade their WR's, one would think that he wouldn't NEED to run as much.

Having him for 10 games isn't a good way to spend $260M (135M guaranteed), either. If they improve the team/backfield, they won't need him to rush for 1,000 yards to make the playoffs. Winning rings is what's important, not games. If they make the playoffs and he's healthy, then they can take the governor off... that doesn't help us in fantasy though.

My guess is that they're thinking that the Ravens will want to keep Jackson healthy, hence, significantly less (if any), designed runs anymore. Just run if things break down.

I'm not as worried about WR's coming off ACL's as I am RB's. To me, this isn't a big deal. Last year, Godwin had 100 receptions and 1000 yards and finished as WR19, coming off an ACL that he tore in December the prior year. He was 9 months removed from surgery and still put up fantasy starter stats on a team with a garbage OC. Williams is doubled the time removed from his ACL than Godwin was. Hamstrings happen to tons of guys who aren't coming off an injury, plus he has what, a 4-game suspension to deal with? I think he'll be fine.

Sorry, thanks. I missed the 10-teamer.

I'm willing to bet that the bulk of that is boob jobs for porn stars and celebrities not wanting to look their age. Also the trans community.

You may end up being right, but I don't agree with you. I think Pacheco is a nice player, but I don't think he's great by any stretch. I'm also not buying into a 3rd round rookie getting at ton of touches either. I think the Jags found out that they had crap after Etienne and needed to add someone respectable to keep Etienne healthy. I think Etienne is going to get 20 touches per game, I can't envision Pacheco getting 14.

@Cloaca du jour won this thread with 2 simple posts. Well done.

I think you're right on this. He's fighting a battle he not only shouldn't be fighting, but is fighting one he can't win. He's 23 years old and going into his contract year. If he goes out and does what he did 2 years ago, he's going to get a big contract. If he does what he did last year, he's going to get the franchise tag. Either way, it's in his best interest to play. Focking around is only going to get him a short term deal that won't be for what he thinks he's worth, that team will run him into the ground the first year, maybe two, then cut him and not deal with him.

It's all about health. You don't even need the MVP season out of him where he threw for 3100 & 36 while rushing for 1200 & 7. His following year where he also played 15 games (2020), he threw for 2700 & 26 while rushing for 1000 & 7 is viable enough to warrant taking him as a top 5 QB. Funny thing is, in 2020 he was QB10 with those numbers. It's funny because those 341 points he got that year would make him QB5 last year. The big question is, do you think he'll be healthy for at least 15 games? The secondary question is, do you think comparable numbers would put him top 5 this year? A final question is, do you think he can fall somewhere between the 2019 MVP season and the 2020 season? Me? My answers are No, No, and No... but that doesn't mean they can't be Yes, Yes, and Yes for someone else.

Etienne is going in the early/mid 3rd round in re-drafts and in a keeper league where people are keeping at least 1 player, that means he'd go in the 2nd round in their draft. That's a 3 round value for a guy who should be a high-end RB2 / low-end RB1. Not knowing the league rules, he may be able to keep him 1 more year. If he throws him back, he's probably not getting Etienne back if he has to wait 20 picks to get his 2nd round pick. I'd rather have Etienne with the possibility of keeping him 1 more year than Pacheco who will probably be my RB3 that I may or may not start most weeks and probably not even keep him next year.

Why's that? I haven't started paying attention to football yet, outside of the Bucs.

No, they'll blame the Republicans... they'll say the parties switched.

They should defund the police completely and use social workers in the communist states and use real police officers in American states. You'll know which is which by the 81M.

Yup. But I will make the caveat that when people ask "Who was more responsible for the Patriots... Belichick or Brady", the answer is Brady. Just like the answer was Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe. That doesn't mean their coaches were overrated though, because the teams still won. As you said, other coaches have good and great players and never win.

That's exactly what happens. It turns non-guaranteed money into guaranteed money down the road. What they do is take base pay (which isn't guaranteed), and turn most of it into bonus money (guaranteed), so they can spread it out over more years to free up cap space in the current year. Let's say he had 5 years left on his deal and this year his base pay was $35M. They kick the can down the road by taking $30M of non-guaranteed money (because base pay isn't guaranteed), and giving it to him in bonus money, and leaving it as $5M in base pay. So, he's still getting all $35M of his money... he's not taking less. But, what happens is now that $30M gets spread out over the 5 years, giving each year and extra $6M of cap hit. So, instead of this year being a $35M cap hit, it's only $11M ($5M base pay + $6M bonus from restructure), and that's how they save $24M for this year.

Yup

It can be, but when you look at the list of pre-2008 QB's, at lot of the top guys who had long careers, are Hall of Famers.

If he plays well, only 1 team is getting Caleb Williams next year. I don't follow college football that much but I heard one other kid who's looking to be a high pick, but if I recall, there's only 2. Arizona and Washington are going to make a run at #1 overall in the next draft, I think there'll be a few others like Denver and Vegas who'll be in the running as well, even Tampa if Trask turns out to be just as terrible as Mayfield. Now, all aren't going to be looking to take a QB #1, but the more that are in the conversation, the more likely teams are going to look to trade up or down. At least one or two teams in need of a QB will be on the outside looking in. I can see someone parting with a 2025 #1 pick for Watson.

My bad, I didn't mean to hit too close to home Mr. Simpson, no offense meant.

Common sense agrees, but not every GM/Owner has common sense. Look at the deal Daniel Jones got. It only takes one.