Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

We could always dust off the Transition Tag, let him test the market while retaining the right of first refusal.

(02-01-2024, 02:14 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]We could always dust off the Transition Tag, let him test the market while retaining the right of first refusal.

(02-01-2024, 02:14 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]We could always dust off the Transition Tag, let him test the market while retaining the right of first refusal.

I know you couldn't use both in one season until they changed that in 2020.

Question is:
Can you still use both? , or was that a covid-year thing that has changed since?

(02-01-2024, 02:32 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-01-2024, 02:14 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]We could always dust off the Transition Tag, let him test the market while retaining the right of first refusal.

I know you couldn't use both in one season until they changed that in 2020.

Question is:
Can you still use both? , or was that a covid-year thing that has changed since?

I believe it's still one of each

Edit: Google says I might be wrong but I can't quickly find anything specific

I wouldn't mind keeping Ridley but not for the 2nd rounder.

(02-01-2024, 02:36 PM)nhiverson Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind keeping Ridley but not for the 2nd rounder.

This has pretty much always been my take.

A new contract in addition to giving up a 2nd rounder is not worth it for me.

(02-01-2024, 02:37 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-01-2024, 02:36 PM)nhiverson Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't mind keeping Ridley but not for the 2nd rounder.

This has pretty much always been my take.

A new contract in addition to giving up a 2nd rounder is not worth it for me.

Only happens if Baalke decides to extend him between right now and prior to free agency officially kicking off in March. I don't think he would do that personally. I think it makes the most logical sense to forfeit our 3rd RD pick while still having that additional 3rd RD pick with Taylor signing with the Chiefs last year. 

We're all in agreement there. Just boils down to whether or not Baalke and Allen's camp can hammer out a deal now before tags need to be officially applied. I don't know if we can use a franchise tag and a transition tag in the same year though. I can't find any recent articles stating otherwise. 

The last one I found is from 2021 and it says you can't do it.

First priority is to pay Josh Allen. He plays a premium position and earned a big contract due to last season's performance. Tagging him sends a bad message about the team's willingness to reward the best players for their production.

Once this decision is made, they can move on to Ridley. I'd be o.k. keeping him if it only costs the team a 3rd round pick and the contract is reasonable. The team has bigger needs on both lines which need to be addressed in the draft/free agency and it would be better to not have to use a day 2 draft pick on this position. Sign Allen and then tag Ridley if a deal can't be worked out.

(02-01-2024, 03:02 PM)jaglou53 Wrote: [ -> ]First priority is to pay Josh Allen. He plays a premium position and earned a big contract due to last season's performance. Tagging him sends a bad message about the team's willingness to reward the best players for their production.

Once this decision is made, they can move on to Ridley. I'd be o.k. keeping him if it only costs the team a 3rd round pick and the contract is reasonable. The team has bigger needs on both lines which need to be addressed in the draft/free agency and it would be better to not have to use a day 2 draft pick on this position. Sign Allen and then tag Ridley if a deal can't be worked out.

I'd say tagging him as a place holder until a deal gets worked out, like Engram, is fine. Having him play on the tag? Nah that's a bad message I agree

I like Calvin Ridley, and I hope we can re-sign him, but he is way down my list of offseason priorities.

(02-01-2024, 03:17 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I like Calvin Ridley, and I hope we can re-sign him, but he is way down my list of offseason priorities.

I disagree. I think priority wise, he's second to only Josh Allen. Yes, fully aware that we have at least two to three holes to address along the offensive line and at least two holes at the minimum on the defensive line. 

However, with that said, I feel like we would potentially be just like the 2022 football team if they make an actual play off run. Sure, the pass protection improves a little bit and the running game gets better a little bit. 

We're still going to probably miss having a great route runner with chemistry already established in this offense. Continuity is a real thing. Constantly plugging and playing around at these skill positions, especially the WR position, it just feels a lot like one step forward, two steps back. 

Our schedule is tough this year man. Tough. We're getting the NFC North and AFC East along with some interesting out of conference contests. We need all the quality players we can keep on this roster while also minimizing the need to backfill positions you just invested in last year.

We just saw our 8 - 3 hopeful start to 2023 come to a grinding halt due to injuries, and most of those injuries were in the WR room. Ridley at least stayed healthy when we needed him out there.

I understand it from a cap perspective, tho to lose a 3rd round pick for nothing seems really stupid.

I don't think people understand that while he had his fair share of drops or "miscommunications" he came off a 2 year hiatus and still had 1,000 yards with a team that couldn't get the ball deep (whether you blame that or Trevor on the O line *it's both btw*) seems pretty stupid to let that walk.

(02-01-2024, 08:14 PM)ChrisJagBoy Wrote: [ -> ]I understand it from a cap perspective, tho to lose a 3rd round pick for nothing seems really stupid.

I don't think people understand that while he had his fair share of drops or "miscommunications" he came off a 2 year hiatus and still had 1,000 yards with a team that couldn't get the ball deep (whether you blame that or Trevor on the O line *it's both btw*) seems pretty stupid to let that walk.

If you're Ridley, what would it take as an offer from the Jags to make you sign being less than 6 weeks away from free agency?  For me, I'd have to feel pretty confident it was top of market type money to forgo free agency.  So, to avoid him going to free agency it would likely need to be top of market money and a bump from 3rd to 2nd.

Alternatively, from the Jags FO perspective, they know him best because they just had him for a year.  They know his work ethic, they know if/when he ran a wrong route, etc.  Other GMs aren't dealing with all of the info.  They're working with what he put on tape this past year and are aware of the circumstances that had him out of the NFL for 2 years.  How strong is the market really going to be for him? Would he actually get top tier type money?  I guess we'll find out.  

If I'm the FO here and I like what I saw from him off the field, work ethic etc, I tell him we'll make a strong offer come free agency and tell him we really want him here, but won't be tagging him due to Josh Allen.  If he gets a compelling offer elsewhere and takes it, I target a guy like Gabe Davis in free agency assuming he's available and look to the draft as well.  Nothing Ridley did this year compels me to give up the 2.

Bye. I want a receiver that's got his talent, without the age. He's almost 30 and I'm not giving more than a 2 year deal to a WR at that age. I'd offer him two years 36 million...which I doubt will be enough to keep him in Jacksonville.


Our receiving corps success or failure will depend on TREVOR. CJ Stroud threw the ball to a group of guys. Jordan Love threw it to a bunch of guys. Mahomes...this season threw to Kelsey and a bunch of guys. Whose Detroit's #1 receiver?

Trevor did better the year before with Christian, Zay, MARVIN JONES JR. and our tight end group.

I'd like to have Calvin...but his value shouldn't be more than 20 million per.

Obviously IMO

(02-01-2024, 03:08 PM)imtheblkranger Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-01-2024, 03:02 PM)jaglou53 Wrote: [ -> ]First priority is to pay Josh Allen. He plays a premium position and earned a big contract due to last season's performance. Tagging him sends a bad message about the team's willingness to reward the best players for their production.

Once this decision is made, they can move on to Ridley. I'd be o.k. keeping him if it only costs the team a 3rd round pick and the contract is reasonable. The team has bigger needs on both lines which need to be addressed in the draft/free agency and it would be better to not have to use a day 2 draft pick on this position. Sign Allen and then tag Ridley if a deal can't be worked out.

I'd say tagging him as a place holder until a deal gets worked out, like Engram, is fine. Having him play on the tag? Nah that's a bad message I agree

That's iffy.  Based on Engram's 2022 maybe he deserved the average of the top 5 players for that year.  If so, the only thing the franchise tag took away from him was guaranteed money two or three years in his future, not next year.  
Josh Allen deserves top 3 or maybe top 2 money, not top 5.

maybe it all comes down to how badly Ridley wants to stay. It’s hard for us to know what his bond to the team is behind closed doors. Obviously, he had a rough situation in Atlanta that drove him into a dark place. If he feels like this is a healthier environment for him, maybe he’s willing to stay here, even if it’s not the very top deal. If it’s mutual from that regard, then it can make sense. However, I do think, he is likely going to want to get the top contract he can, given this is likely the last time he’ll make big money in football.

(02-01-2024, 08:14 PM)ChrisJagBoy Wrote: [ -> ]I understand it from a cap perspective, tho to lose a 3rd round pick for nothing seems really stupid.

I don't think people understand that while he had his fair share of drops or "miscommunications" he came off a 2 year hiatus and still had 1,000 yards with a team that couldn't get the ball deep (whether you blame that or Trevor on the O line *it's both btw*) seems pretty stupid to let that walk.

That's funny considering Trevor was rated as the best deep ball passer in the NFL for a good majority of the season and still finished top 5 in most all of the deep ball categories.

(02-01-2024, 09:38 PM)AnOldBrownie Wrote: [ -> ]Bye.  I want a receiver that's got his talent, without the age.  He's almost 30 and I'm not giving more than a 2 year deal to a WR at that age.  I'd offer him two years 36 million...which I doubt will be enough to keep him in Jacksonville.


Our receiving corps success or failure will depend on TREVOR.  CJ Stroud threw the ball to a group of guys.  Jordan Love threw it to a bunch of guys. Mahomes...this season threw to Kelsey and a bunch of guys.  Whose Detroit's #1 receiver?

Trevor did better the year before with Christian, Zay, MARVIN JONES JR. and our tight end group.

I'd like to have Calvin...but his value shouldn't be more than 20 million per.

Obviously IMO

This one right here, yep.  Modifying only Trevor And the oline.

Would i like to have him, ya betcha.  Would it stress me out, nah.

We need to keep good players while they are still in their prime. Super contending potential teams have playmaking difference makers. Lawrence needs weapons. Don’t mess this up Balkie.

(02-02-2024, 03:07 AM)Jag88 Wrote: [ -> ]We need to keep good players while they are still in their prime. Super contending potential teams have playmaking difference makers. Lawrence needs weapons. Don’t mess this up Balkie.

Baalke will find a way to screw this up just like he did last off season.

Anybody with half a brain knew Allen should have been locked up/extended this past off season, so we could then focus on/lock up Lawrence to a new deal this off season and tag Ridley.