Welcome Baker Mayfield

[Backside]

That Mahomes contract was surprising at the time but seems quaint now. $50m AAV would be #12 for QBs

That’s according to OTC. Assuming they are trustworthy, Kirk Cousins makes the same AAV as Mahomes currently and has more fully guaranteed money. Cousins has a $40m dollar cap hit this upcoming season, tied for sixth among all QBs (Mahomes $28m, Baker $26.5m for reference)

There’s paying Baker too much for his next contract, and then there’s doing THAT to your cap space. Remember when people argued that signing Cousins was a good move for ATL? Woof

[Pirate Life]

Why is Burrow considered elite? He has missed the playoffs two years in a row. He also can’t overcome a bad defense. He arguably has had a better supporting cast on offense. He also has significant injury history.

He arguably has the worst o-line in the league.

[__Chef__]

...Remember when people argued that signing Cousins was a good move for ATL? Woof

We laughed, until he swept us last year.

[Backside]

...Remember when people argued that signing Cousins was a good move for ATL? Woof

We laughed, until he swept us last year.

Still laughing from atop the division. Crazy that even with going full air raid against us twice he was still dreadful overall for the season. For sure a major ding on Bowles and the defense for allowing that to happen though

[BucsNBills]

You know, if Baker wanted to break the meta, he'd just re-up his current deal with some nice incentives tossed in. He already has generational wealth, and with numbers getting so big, none of it really matters after a certain point.

3 year, $100 mil guaranteed. That's monopoly money as is, but now the team gets an extra $25-30 mil to spend on the roster. A Super bowl or deep playoff runs will do far more for Bakers legacy than any money will at this point.

But he won't, nor will any QB try to use that cheat code more than likely.

Greed is a helluva drug.

[Bootz]

You know, if Baker wanted to break the meta, he'd just re-up his current deal with some nice incentives tossed in. He already has generational wealth, and with numbers getting so big, none of it really matters after a certain point.

3 year, $100 mil guaranteed. That's monopoly money as is, but now the team gets an extra $25-30 mil to spend on the roster. A Super bowl or deep playoff runs will do far more for Bakers legacy than any money will at this point.

But he won't, nor will any QB try to use that cheat code more than likely.

Greed is a helluva drug.

This is very disingenuous. Greed has nothing to do with this, especially from the players perspective. The CBA hands rookies generational wealth as soon as they sign their 1st contract. The CBA also shares the wealth with players, which is why the cap allocation rises substantially every year. Players are simply keeping up with the money flow.

I don’t recall hearing anyone say AWJ or Wirfs should re-up their deals with incentives since they’ve both made generational money (AWJ grew up rich as his dad was the one who had established the generational wealth). Baker shouldn’t be the exception.

[BucsNBills]

Non-QBs are different because their legacies aren't as closely tied to playoff or Super Bowl success as quarterbacks. Not close.

Plus there shelf life is considerably shorter than a QB, so they have to get what the can get.

And even with these crazy non-QB contracts, they're still $20 mil behind quarterbacks.

Look at Mahomes, the only reason he has to play anymore is to catch Brady. If I'm him, I take considerably less money than others so the team can be bolsters. Functionally there's no difference for someone like Mahomes between $60mil vs $20 or 30 million per year. But letting that money go to the team could be the difference between winning the Super Bowl or not.

[Doctor]

I'm curious, do you just pee directly into your own mouth or do you put it in cheerios first?

So is Greg wrong or you?

Well will you look at that. Greg uses 10 times as many words as you and none of them are "only".

[Bootz]

Non-QBs are different because their legacies aren't as closely tied to playoff or Super Bowl success as quarterbacks. Not close.

Plus there shelf life is considerably shorter than a QB, so they have to get what the can get.

And even with these crazy non-QB contracts, they're still $20 mil behind quarterbacks.

Look at Mahomes, the only reason he has to play anymore is to catch Brady. If I'm him, I take considerably less money than others so the team can be bolsters. Functionally there's no difference for someone like Mahomes between $60mil vs $20 or 30 million per year. But letting that money go to the team could be the difference between winning the Super Bowl or not.

Again, disingenuous. You're creating a world that you know doesn't exist and can't.

[acmillis]

Non-QBs are different because their legacies aren't as closely tied to playoff or Super Bowl success as quarterbacks. Not close.

Plus there shelf life is considerably shorter than a QB, so they have to get what the can get.

And even with these crazy non-QB contracts, they're still $20 mil behind quarterbacks.

Look at Mahomes, the only reason he has to play anymore is to catch Brady. If I'm him, I take considerably less money than others so the team can be bolsters. Functionally there's no difference for someone like Mahomes between $60mil vs $20 or 30 million per year. But letting that money go to the team could be the difference between winning the Super Bowl or not.

Again, disingenuous. You're creating a world that you know doesn't exist and can't.

I'm with Boootzie on this one. Do some players take less to stay "home?" Sure, but it happens so infrequently that you can name them because you remember when it happens. THAT is how rare it is. Brady, Evans, didn't Anthony Barr burn the Jets to return to MIN? Depending on what state you live in, grossing 20M as an athlete results in a net of less than 50% of that. Remember how manu times in the 2010s that we won free agency? It wasn't because we were a good team and players wanted to be part of that culture..it was because we offered a ton of money and theres no state income tax. In fact, we were the antithesis of stability in those years...and it didn't matter for free agents. Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't.

[CannonFire]

Here's the serious response and I've said it a million times, but people want to make it out that I think he sucks. Mayfield is one of like 20 guys who are same guy in different situations. The ONLY people who should be paid a lot, are the elites... like Mahomes and Burrow (I'm not even sure Jackson and Allen belong with those two), but I digress. After those few, NO ONE should be making more than like $25M AAV. Of course, many will be triggered, but notice, I'm including guys like Dak, Lawrence, Hurts, Goff, Stafford, etc, all in this, so it's not a "Baker Mayfield" issue... it's a league-wide issue. I just don't think the Bucs should be stupid like the Jags, Cowboys, Lions, Eagles, Rams, etc, and pay these guys a ton of money when they'd be better off spending on the OLine and DLine, then the offensive supporting cast. If you have a great OLine and DLine, then add in 1 great WR, and a solid backfield, literally any starting caliber QB in the NFL, would get that team to a winning record.

I have no problem with Mayfield, I just wouldn't pay him a lot of money. I'd rather spend it elsewhere. Now, I fully expect them to do something stupid like give him a 4 year $220M deal, but that's because they allowed themselves to be put in that situation. Me, I'd offer him a 7 year $175M deal that's $25M every year, and they're all guaranteed. See that haters, I have no problem locking him in for 7 more years and paying him. Would any of you lock him in for 7 years where you can't get out of it without taking a big hit?

Genuinely, I understand the point you’re making here, and your overall stance. The following is not specific to Baker at all, just trying to better understand your QB evaluation process:

Do you really believe that after the very top tier, and until you get to the bottom of the barrel, that there is basically no differentiating at all between professional QBs? Of course situation and team contribute to success or failure, that goes for every single QB, including the elite ones. But that doesn’t mean they are all the same player and situation is all that matters for them. What if you put the right guy (skillset, attitude, leadership, etc) into just the right situation? If he thrives there do you genuinely think that you could take any of the other ~20 from this group you mention and the results would be the same? Even if you are all in on the situation being more important than anything, surely you’d never argue that the skillsets, strengths, weaknesses, and intangibles of all those guys are also the same. The right QB to the right situation also has to matter. And the wrong guy, right situation, right guy, wrong situation, etc would all be possible outcomes when we discuss this group of QBs who you say can’t be differentiated. That’s where I really bump up against the “mix and match any of these ‘average’ guys” theory, it just seems like a massive oversimplification of something these billion dollar entities have been trying and failing to get right for decades.

I don’t disagree with you on Burrow at all. I think he’s near the top of any best QB list. But based on how you do the evaluation, it kind of seems like he ruins your whole theory because you put him at that very top level. So why did he miss the playoffs last year playing all 17 games with a career season as a QB and one of the best WR seasons in recent memory by his future HoF teammate? I know that personally I can say he did about as much as can reasonably be expected, and his atrocious defense let him down. But doesn’t that argument not really fly with you? Doesn’t he NEED to elevate his team and find a way to win one of the first three games of the season which were all one score games (10 points against the Patriots? Oof)? If you say “I watch this dude and it’s very obvious what he is as a QB results be damned” I certainly wouldn’t argue against it, but again that would seem like you’d be opening up to the idea that there is more context that is worth considering.


TLDR: I just really don’t think it’s anywhere near as simple and black and white as you make it out to be.

I never said "bottom of the barrel", I've said "about 20", so after the top 5, that leaves about 7 as the "bottom of the barrel". That bottom tier though, are guys that we don't know about... such as rookies and/or 1 year starters. I don't know yet, where to put them. Do I think there's a talent difference among that "about 20"? Sure, but I don't think that difference matters. For example... Jalen Hurts, let's say he's the best QB outside the top elite tier. Let's put him on Cleveland this year. How many games are they winning? 5? Is that any different than what Flacco will get them? Maybe 1 more win? How about Tennessee. They had the #1 pick in the draft. Their best WR's are Ridley and Lockett. Tyjae Spears is their best RB and they have one of the worst defenses in the league. How many wins will Cam Ward have with them and how many do you think they'd get with Hurts? Do you think the number is high? So, if the next best QB in the NFL can't make a marketable impact on a bad team, how important or how much of a difference maker do you think he is? I think Ward will win 3 games... Hurts might get them up to 4. I believe that one of the elite guys would make them competent, like 7 wins, maybe even 8.

Here's why I say that. Let's still stick with Jalen Hurts. He was the leader of team that quit on their OC and DC just 18 months ago. They get new coaches and an elite RB, boom... Super Bowl. How about the 2022 season? Lost in the Super Bowl with different coordinators. Let's go 1 more year back... 2021, the year we embarrassed them in the playoffs where after the game, even Philadelphia people were wondering if they need to move on from Hurts. They were 9-8 and laughed out of the playoffs. It was with the same coordinators as the following year... but wait, in 2022, they also added AJ Brown. So, you give a talented QB a stud WR and good coaching staff, they get to a Super Bowl. They then add an elite RB, and they win a Super Bowl. Clearly, Hurts wasn't the reason. Are you going to tell me that you don't think there is like at least 10 to 15 QB's (not in the elite tier), who couldn't win a Super Bowl with an elite defense, elite OLine, and elite offensive supporting cast? Dude, Kyler Murray could've won that Super Bowl. Before you poo poo that, keep in mind that Murray has a better comp% than Hurts, similar TD and Int percentages, and has 30 more TD passes than Hurts. Yes, he played 1 more season than Hurts, but if Hurts plays all 17 games and Murray 0 this coming year, Hurts will have 1 more start. The most TD's Hurts threw in a season, was 23. You think he's going to throw 30 this year? The point I'm making with that is that Murray has never had great talent around him... never had an elite OLine, never had an elite RB, never had great WR's, yet their numbers aren't all that far apart. Murray's career passer rating is 92.4, Hurts is 93.5. Murray has 3 seasons with a QBR over 60, so does Hurts. So, really, what's the difference? The difference is the supporting cast.

Even Trevor Lawrence's metrics aren't all that far off from Hurts and Lawrence probably played for the worst roster in the NFL his whole career. People here want to jerk themselves off to Mayfield's 2023 and 2024 numbers... go look at what Lawrence did in 2022 and 2023 and tell me how they're so much worse than Mayfield's and his best WR was a 30 year old TE who can't run. Can you sit there and tell me that a guy who completed over 65% of his passes, threw for 4000 yards, and 21+ TD's 2 years in a row with no help on offense, couldn't throw for 4500 yards and 30 TD's on this team? Seriously?

Daniel Jones with the worst offensive line in the NFL in 2022, completed 67% of his passes, had a 92.5 passer rating and 62.9 QBR... his best WR was Darius Slayton. Prior to coming to Tampa, Mayfield never completed 67% of his passes, had a 92.5 passer rating AND 62.9 QBR in any season. He didn't even do that here in 2023. It wasn't until last year that he managed that. How is it that only Baker Mayfield can do that and not anyone else, not even a guy like Daniel Jones?

All of these NFL QB's are talented, does it really matter if one is a bit more talented than someone else? I don't think so. I think the supporting cast makes a bigger difference. Pittsburgh has a winning record every year, even in years where their QB was Mason Rudolph. Is Dak Prescott really all that much better than a guy like Trevor Lawrence? Baker Mayfield? Derek Carr (when he was healthy)? Geno Smith?

Geno Smith (Avg season in Seattle... last 3 years): 68.5%, 4200 yards, 24.5 TD's. 12.1 Ints, 95.5 passer rating
Prescott (career): 66.8%, 4380 yards, 29.7 TD's, 11.4 Int's, 98.1 passer rating


Last year, I'd contend that if he wasn't on the team, they win 5 games... yet, they won 9 in a division with a 10-game & 12-game winner, and that was with the 25th ranked defense and the 2nd to worst offensive line in the NFL. Interesting tid-bit: Under Zac Taylor, the Bengals are 1-5 in W1. My suggestion, take the Browns over the Bengals W1, money line. From an overall talent perspective, last year's Bengals team probably ranks in the bottom 10 of the NFL, and they still had a winning record.

The year that the Bengals went to the Super Bowl, they had the 17th ranked and a bad offensive line. The following year, their defense was definitely better, and interestingly, the OLine was worse, and still made it to the AFCCG. He's shown that if you at least give him an "average" defense, he can get you to at least the AFCCG and maybe to the Super Bowl.

[CannonFire]

I'd offer him a 7 year $175M deal that's $25M every year, and they're all guaranteed.

Why would Baker agree to that deal? That's a deal you give to a solid, steady backup QB who doesn't turn the ball over, but doesn't risk and win you the game either. This is "I have an elite defense and team around my solidly unspectacular QB who isn't going to ruin the teams playoff runs for the next 7 years" contract. That's not this team and that's not Baker Mayfield.

Do something like a 5 year 50/yr, no guarantees deal and if he starts stinking it up and/or there's an opportunity to go get a superstar can't lose guy ... like oh I dunno, Deshaun Watson ... then great. The contract isn't locking anyone down, and it isn't insultingly underpaying him while he's here either.

I get your contention about overpaying for talent that is less than elite. But I'd much rather be paying Baker Mayfield Purdy's contract than Purdy.

Wait, what backup QB ever got $175M in guaranteed money? Last year, did all of the backups combined even total $175M?

Why would Mayfield do that deal? I thought people on this board said he was the team leader, the players loved him, the coaches love him, and he really wants to win. That's not true? What says "team leader", "wanting to win", more than taking a lot of money, but making sure the team has a lot of money to help? Last time I remember a QB doing that, he went to and won a bunch of Super Bowls in New England.

I think Mayfield, and every other QB in the league would rather have the deal I proposed than 5 for $50M AAV with no guarantees. They could be out of a job in 1 year. The sticking point in every contract is always the guaranteed money. No one is signing a 5 year deal with no guaranteed money, unless they stink.

I wouldn't pay either one of them that money. If I was forced to pay one, I would agree with you, only because Mayfield has shown to be more durable. If I'm paying someone that much money, I want them on the field.

[CannonFire]

LOL, I think it's funny that just because the Bengals have Ja'Marr Chase, some people think that team was good. That Bengals team is really bad. They won 9 game because Burrow was there. Their OLine was trash. Their running game is mediocre. Their defense is horrible. Without Burrow that's a 5 win team, tops. I wouldn't be surprised if they won 2 or 3.

I also find it how people on one hand say how bad of an organization the Bengals are, but yet downplay Burrow. Can't have it both ways. Either the organization is bad and as a result have a bad team and Burrow is great or the organization isn't bad and have a good team, and Burrow is overrated.

From a link I posted in another response:

"According to PFF’s wins above replacement metric, Joe Burrow was far and away the most valuable player in the league, worth 5.22 wins in 2024. The next closest player was Lamar Jackson at 3.86. In fact, Joe Burrow’s WAR number is the highest the league has seen since Tom Brady was worth 6.15 WAR in 2017. Patrick Mahomes in 2018 was the only other quarterback to be worth at least five wins during that stretch."

[Grahamburn]

Burrow has Chase AND Higgins. He also had Mixon until last year. Come on.

Baker had the worst running game in the NFL in 2023. He went nuts with a real running game in 2024. I think people are just asking you to be objective in the analysis.

[BucsNBills]

Again, disingenuous. You're creating a world that you know doesn't exist and can't.

I'm with Boootzie on this one. Do some players take less to stay "home?" Sure, but it happens so infrequently that you can name them because you remember when it happens. THAT is how rare it is. Brady, Evans, didn't Anthony Barr burn the Jets to return to MIN? Depending on what state you live in, grossing 20M as an athlete results in a net of less than 50% of that. Remember how manu times in the 2010s that we won free agency? It wasn't because we were a good team and players wanted to be part of that culture..it was because we offered a ton of money and theres no state income tax. In fact, we were the antithesis of stability in those years...and it didn't matter for free agents. Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't.

It's not really about taking a home town discount. It's about pushing aside greed for a large competitive advantage, nothing more.

[acmillis]

I'm with Boootzie on this one. Do some players take less to stay "home?" Sure, but it happens so infrequently that you can name them because you remember when it happens. THAT is how rare it is. Brady, Evans, didn't Anthony Barr burn the Jets to return to MIN? Depending on what state you live in, grossing 20M as an athlete results in a net of less than 50% of that. Remember how manu times in the 2010s that we won free agency? It wasn't because we were a good team and players wanted to be part of that culture..it was because we offered a ton of money and theres no state income tax. In fact, we were the antithesis of stability in those years...and it didn't matter for free agents. Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't.

It's not really about taking a home town discount. It's about pushing aside greed for a large competitive advantage, nothing more.

...and that happens very infrequently. Hell, Myles Garrett publicly demanded a trade this offseason. Cleveland, you know, the bottom of the barrel franchise for decades now, through him the largest bag ever for a non-qb. What did he do? He signed immediately. Not because he thinks Cleveland has even one iota of being decent, but because money talks. You can love the game and still care more about money. That's pretty much the NFL.

[CannonFire]

Burrow has Chase AND Higgins. He also had Mixon until last year. Come on.

Baker had the worst running game in the NFL in 2023. He went nuts with a real running game in 2024. I think people are just asking you to be objective in the analysis.

LOL, yeah, I'm not the one being objective.

(like I said, some have one standard for our team but a different for others) Baker had the worst running game in the NFL in 2023 you say? But Cincy had it better in 2023 and 2024? Let's take a look at that, shall we?

Rachaad White (2023): 336 touches, 4.6 ypt, 1539 yards

Chase Brown (2024): 283, 4.8, 1350

Joe Mixon (2023): 309, 4.6, 1410


What shows you that we had it worse than Cincinnati? Guess the Bengals were pretty bad too. Also, I posted 2 separate links stating how poor the OLine was for Cincinnati, they had them ranked 31st in the NFL. Baker NEVER had a line that bad here. In 2023, we ranked in the top 10 in pass, and in the low teens in run blocking... overall, like 12th. In 2024, we ranked 7th in both, I believe. That's a lot better than 25th in run/pass blocking and then 28th/31st. Our defense ranked 16th this past season, the Bengals 25th. Virtually every outlet has the AFC North as either the toughest or second toughest division in the league and the NFC South as the easiest or second easiest... the Bengals with a much worse team overall in a much harder division (and conference), won 9 games, we won 10.

So yeah, gtfoh with ME being the one who isn't objective. Everything you post is 100% bias.

[Grahamburn]

What do Rachaad White's yards per touch have to do with the running game? If anything it shows how bad he was as a runner when his best attribute is his ability as a receiver. Objectively, the Bucs had the worst running game in the NFL in 2023. They had the fewest total yards rushing and the fewest yards per carry. A truly abysmal 3.4. Baker did what he did with NO THREAT of a running game.

The Bengals choosing not to run the ball very often doesn't mean they had a bad running game. They were middle of the pack in yards per carry at 4.0 and had Joe Mixon rush for over 1,000 yards.

[Buc2]

@CannonFire makes good points, I will give him that.

I know it was a different era, but look back to the Bucs 1st SB win in the 2002 season. They won with Brad freaking Johnson at QB. Imagine what that season would have looked like with one of the elite QBs like Peyton Manning, Drew Bledsoe or, yes, Rich Gannon. They very well could have matched the Dolphins with an undefeated season.

Don't get me wrong. 12-4 was a great record and Brad Johnson had a damn fine season that year with a 92.9 passer rating. That was his highest ever rating and only the 2nd time he recorded a 90 or better (he had a 90.0 with the Redskins in '99). His career rating was 82.5. So, would 2002 not have happened without The Bull or was it the team around him that made it happen including a HoF defense? He had some damn fine players on his side of the ball, too. Pittman and Alstott at RB. McCardell and Keyshawn at WR. Look at some of the "mediocre" QBs from that season. Aaron Brooks. Steve McNair. Hell, even Jeff Garcia. Could the Bucs not have done just as well that season with one of them instead? I say, yes. Yes they could have.

I'm just not convinced Baker is worth many wins. At least not like Mahomes, Burrow, or Brady were. If he were even close to their level, the Bucs would have run away with the NFC South last season even with a mediocre defense and missing some star offensive players for some games.

And y'all know I like Baker and hope he's with the team for some years to come. Yes, statistically, Baker was a top 10 QB in 2024. One season. If he wants to remain a top 10 QB, he has to keep performing at that level for the next few years at least. But I'm not going to delude myself into believing he's more than he is. Yet. For that to happen, it will take more than a great 2024 statistical season to convince me.

[CannonFire]

What do Rachaad White's yards per touch have to do with the running game? If anything it shows how bad he was as a runner when his best attribute is his ability as a receiver. Objectively, the Bucs had the worst running game in the NFL in 2023. They had the fewest total yards rushing and the fewest yards per carry. A truly abysmal 3.4. Baker did what he did with NO THREAT of a running game.

The Bengals choosing not to run the ball very often doesn't mean they had a bad running game. They were middle of the pack in yards per carry at 4.0 and had Joe Mixon rush for over 1,000 yards.

Cincinnati wasn't all that good rushing dude. They were 30th in attempts and yards, because their defense sucked so bad. They were ranked 20th in yards per attempt. That's not something to point to and say "Look, they're good!". In 2023, with Mixon, it was pretty much the same thing. I mean, I don't call 22 as "middle of the pack", but you can, I guess. I call that below average. Besides, you saw for yourself what happens when you improve your OLine. Rachaad White went from 3.6 to 4.3 yards per carry.

What exactly did Baker do with "NO THREAT" of a running game? In the easiest division in the NFL, he had the 20th ranked offense. He ranked 19th in comp%, 10th in TD%, 23rd in Int%, 12th in passer rating, and 19th in QBR... overall, about league average. What did Burrow do? In the hardest division in the NFL, he had the 6th ranked offense. He ranked 4th in comp%, 4th in TD%, 5th in Int%, 3rd in passer rating, and 3rd in QBR. PFF graded Mayfield at 19th in 2023. How'd they grade Burrow this past season?

[Backside]

I’m just confused because all of these QBs you’re comparing are guys who got the massive contract extension that you don’t want to give Baker. Dak, Lawrence, Hurts, Kyler, etc. could all go into the Eagles situation and win the SB, okay sure, so could Baker. But all of those guys are also paid near the top of the league, so I guess those huge QB contracts you rail against aren’t really holding the team back like you say?

Like where are the cheap journeyman QBs you say could step into Bakers spot without skipping a beat? Your post was pretty light on the Fields and Minshews of the world. Daniel Jones I guess? He’s been much more bad than good, you can say he’d be as good or better than Baker here if you want, I’d disagree and hope we never have to find out who was right.

Your post seemed to confirm that paying a QB, even a non elite one, a top contract is fine, you just need to build a great team around them to have playoff success. That was always the case though and no one argued it. We argue against playing musical chairs with cheap journeyman QBs just because the rest of our offense is good and a nice situation to drop a QB into.

Again, the best example to your point of a giant QB contract crippling a teams ability to build out a roster is… Joe Burrow who got paid, made sure his WRs got paid. And his defense that was great in the playoffs getting him to a Super Bowl has completely fallen apart. But if they had just drafted well the last few years, like the Eagles, they’d be fine. So again it really doesn’t seem to be about giving the QB a giant contract at all. It’s about building a great roster around them whether they are elite or in that tier below. No where in that post did you state the merits of building an amazing roster and picking up cheap journeyman QBs who you rotate out for a new one as soon as they are due to be paid.

[Buc2]

I’m just confused because all of these QBs you’re comparing are guys who got the massive contract extension that you don’t want to give Baker. Dak, Lawrence, Hurts, Kyler, etc. could all go into the Eagles situation and win the SB, okay sure, so could Baker. But all of those guys are also paid near the top of the league, so I guess those huge QB contracts you rail against aren’t really holding the team back like you say?

Like where are the cheap journeyman QBs you say could step into Bakers spot without skipping a beat? Your post was pretty light on the Fields and Minshews of the world. Daniel Jones I guess? He’s been much more bad than good, you can say he’d be as good or better than Baker here if you want, I’d disagree and hope we never have to find out who was right.

Your post seemed to confirm that paying a QB, even a non elite one, a top contract is fine, you just need to build a great team around them to have playoff success. That was always the case though and no one argued it. We argue against playing musical chairs with cheap journeyman QBs just because the rest of our offense is good and a nice situation to drop a QB into.

Again, the best example to your point of a giant QB contract crippling a teams ability to build out a roster is… Joe Burrow who got paid, made sure his WRs got paid. And his defense that was great in the playoffs getting him to a Super Bowl has completely fallen apart. But if they had just drafted well the last few years, like the Eagles, they’d be fine. So again it really doesn’t seem to be about giving the QB a giant contract at all. It’s about building a great roster around them whether they are elite or in that tier below. No where in that post did you state the merits of building an amazing roster and picking up cheap journeyman QBs who you rotate out for a new one as soon as they are due to be paid.

There aren't any cheap starting QBs anymore. We'd all love to pay less, but the reality is that won't happen in the NFL anymore. So, Baker will be paid or we will have another QB under center. Like it or not. CF is saying he hates paying that much for a QB that, in reality, is not all that much better than 10 others. But, it's not going to matter what CF hates because the reality is he's going to be paid. Here or elsewhere. And the Bucs won't get any of those 10 others without also having to pay them. They lucked out with Baker. That's not always going to be the case. So, yes...if he has another good year this season, and it doesn't even have to be as statistically good as 2024, I think the Bucs should lock him in.

[Pirate Life]

@CannonFire makes good points, I will give him that.

I know it was a different era, but look back to the Bucs 1st SB win in the 2002 season. They won with Brad freaking Johnson at QB. Imagine what that season would have looked like with one of the elite QBs like Peyton Manning, Drew Bledsoe or, yes, Rich Gannon. They very well could have matched the Dolphins with an undefeated season.

Don't get me wrong. 12-4 was a great record and Brad Johnson had a damn fine season that year with a 92.9 passer rating. That was his highest ever rating and only the 2nd time he recorded a 90 or better (he had a 90.0 with the Redskins in '99). His career rating was 82.5. So, would 2002 not have happened without The Bull or was it the team around him that made it happen including a HoF defense? He had some damn fine players on his side of the ball, too. Pittman and Alstott at RB. McCardell and Keyshawn at WR. Look at some of the "mediocre" QBs from that season. Aaron Brooks. Steve McNair. Hell, even Jeff Garcia. Could the Bucs not have done just as well that season with one of them instead? I say, yes. Yes they could have.

I'm just not convinced Baker is worth many wins. At least not like Mahomes, Burrow, or Brady were. If he were even close to their level, the Bucs would have run away with the NFC South last season even with a mediocre defense and missing some star offensive players for some games.

And y'all know I like Baker and hope he's with the team for some years to come. Yes, statistically, Baker was a top 10 QB in 2024. One season. If he wants to remain a top 10 QB, he has to keep performing at that level for the next few years at least. But I'm not going to delude myself into believing he's more than he is. Yet. For that to happen, it will take more than a great 2024 statistical season to convince me.

The 2002 team won the SB because an all-time great defense had an average offense finally, much of that was due to Gruden not going turtle mode offensively like Dungy used to with a slight lead. 18th ranked in 2002 as opposed to 27th in '99 when the defense was even better than they were in the SB year. I don't think anyone here is saying Mayfield's the greatest QB or should be considered as one of the top tier ones a la Jackson, Burrow, Allen, or Mahomes. He's in the next tier down, but there's not 20 guys in the league that could step in for him with no drop off in production either.

[Grahamburn]

I think that's probably the most important underlying theme in this entire conversation/argument. We know Baker can play. He has proven it. Anyone who hasn't proven it is going to be a draft pick, and you're rolling the dice on the value of their contract versus their ability to actually get the job done at the same level as someone like Baker Mayfield.

[Bootz]

4 yr(s) / $220,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $75,000,000
GTD at Sign: $100,800,000
Total GTD: $160,300,000


Who says no to this?

[Pirate Life]

4 yr(s) / $220,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $75,000,000
GTD at Sign: $100,800,000
Total GTD: $160,300,000


Who says no to this?

Cannonfire. =)

[acmillis]

4 yr(s) / $220,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $75,000,000
GTD at Sign: $100,800,000
Total GTD: $160,300,000


Who says no to this?

methinks we can retain Trask for far less than that

/blue

[Bootz]

Now who says no to this?

Contract Terms: 5 yr(s) / $275,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $37,500,000
GTD at Sign: $142,000,000
Total GTD: $200,000,000

Same AAV. 1 additional year. Lower signing bonus, more total guarantees.

[Sooner06]

Now who says no to this?

Contract Terms: 5 yr(s) / $275,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $37,500,000
GTD at Sign: $142,000,000
Total GTD: $200,000,000

Same AAV. 1 additional year. Lower signing bonus, more total guarantees.

That's about what I was thinking. Except at around $50M/yr and the total gtd around $165-175M. But I was just spitballing the numbers. I think the 5 yrs is what Baker will be more interested in.

[CannonFire]

I’m just confused because all of these QBs you’re comparing are guys who got the massive contract extension that you don’t want to give Baker. Dak, Lawrence, Hurts, Kyler, etc. could all go into the Eagles situation and win the SB, okay sure, so could Baker. But all of those guys are also paid near the top of the league, so I guess those huge QB contracts you rail against aren’t really holding the team back like you say?

Like where are the cheap journeyman QBs you say could step into Bakers spot without skipping a beat? Your post was pretty light on the Fields and Minshews of the world. Daniel Jones I guess? He’s been much more bad than good, you can say he’d be as good or better than Baker here if you want, I’d disagree and hope we never have to find out who was right.

Your post seemed to confirm that paying a QB, even a non elite one, a top contract is fine, you just need to build a great team around them to have playoff success. That was always the case though and no one argued it. We argue against playing musical chairs with cheap journeyman QBs just because the rest of our offense is good and a nice situation to drop a QB into.

Again, the best example to your point of a giant QB contract crippling a teams ability to build out a roster is… Joe Burrow who got paid, made sure his WRs got paid. And his defense that was great in the playoffs getting him to a Super Bowl has completely fallen apart. But if they had just drafted well the last few years, like the Eagles, they’d be fine. So again it really doesn’t seem to be about giving the QB a giant contract at all. It’s about building a great roster around them whether they are elite or in that tier below. No where in that post did you state the merits of building an amazing roster and picking up cheap journeyman QBs who you rotate out for a new one as soon as they are due to be paid.

What's holding those guys back is that they're not winning, only the Eagles. Only the Chiefs. Only the Niners. It's the organizations who have great teams around the QB, or have the elites. This Eagles team was pretty much built before Hurts got paid. Remember, the year the Eagles lost to the Chiefs was Hurts' last year of his rookie deal. They had this team in place, except for Barkley. It's easy to configure a QB's contract after the team is built. Dak never won with the Cowboys because they were never a great team in the first place. Lawrence isn't winning anything in Jacksonville. Murray isn't winning in Arizona. The QB paycheck came first. Now, if you want to make the argument that we're in "Win now" mode and the final piece is locking up Mayfield, sure, you could. I think a lot of Bucs fans would agree with you... don't think anyone else in the world would.

When you look at our roster, the only guys who got paid that are actually good... are Wirfs, Evans, Godwin, Vea, and Winfield. That's it. No one else is making real money. If we sign Mayfield to a $50M+ AAV contract, we'll just like Dallas, Jacksonville, Arizona, etc. We're paying for the QB at the wrong time and we'll be pretenders. Is our team really better than last year? I don't think so. More ammo to my point. Let's say that in 2023, we don't win the tie-breaker to the Saints and miss the playoffs, do you think he gets the same deal he got? I don't. I think he gets a 3 year deal, but I believe it would've been for $60M not $100M. Let's say that Kirk Cousins doesn't tear his Achilles and was perfectly healthy last year, and we they win the division. Is Mayfield getting an extension? I don't think so. Is there any talk about Mayfield getting a $55M AAV contract? I don't think so. Notice, I didn't say anything about our team being any different... I'm talking about 1 teams tie-breakers and another team having a healthy QB.

People are allowing the luck factor of being in a crappy division prevent them from seeing what's actually there. What happens if Penix is actually good? What happens if Bryce Young not only continues on the growth he showed in the 2nd half of last season, but gets even better? We already have a fairly tough schedule. If Atlanta and Carolina are actually good, our schedule gets even tougher. If Mayfield has year like 2023... no one said it was a bad year, but let's say he replicates that because the schedule is pretty tough and Grizzard isn't as good an OC as Coen was. We go 8-9 and miss the playoffs. What's the atmosphere like around a new contract for Baker?

[CannonFire]

4 yr(s) / $220,000,000
Average Salary: $55,000,000
Signing Bonus: $75,000,000
GTD at Sign: $100,800,000
Total GTD: $160,300,000


Who says no to this?

Cannonfire. =)

Licht forced this situation, doesn't matter if I would or wouldn't.

[Pirate Life]

Cannonfire. =)

Licht forced this situation, doesn't matter if I would or wouldn't.

Licht didn't force the situation, the economics of the league did. As long as the league keeps increasing the dollar amounts on contracts at the rates they have been the past decade or so for mid tier talent across the board this is going to continue.

[Grahamburn]

"Force the situation" by signing the league leader in TD passes the last two years to an $8M prove it contract and then the best value QB contract in the NFL? Lulz. That's one way to put it. Most would call it a good problem to have.

[Bootz]

"Force the situation" by signing the league leader in TD passes the last two years to an $8M prove it contract and then the best value QB contract in the NFL? Lulz. That's one way to put it. Most would call it a good problem to have.

Most would also say if you’re using TD passes as your barometer when it comes to contract negotiations that you have no clue what you’re doing. Additionally, using your logic you just answered your “why is Burrow seen as elite” question. He puts up pretty stats.

Best value QB contract right now is by far Jalen Hurts. 11th highest paid QB is the reigning SB MVP. That SHOULD be your barometer. Not stats.

[Babeinbucland]