Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Blake Bortles Signs With L.A. Rams

#81

(03-20-2019, 01:02 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 12:30 PM)FBT Wrote: I think he liked the situation in LA, and figured a one year contract was a good way for him to separate himself from the stank of his inconsistent career.  He's getting paid this year regardless, so pulling in an extra million to hold a clipboard and learn from one of the young offensive geniuses in the league might turn out to be a great career move for him.  It also gets him closer to his trainers out in SoCal who have been working with him on his mechanics.  Maybe taking the pressure off of his back of being the guy will allow him the chance to fix himself?  We'll see.  I don't think there's much risk for him.

He’s not actually getting an extra million.

Right no double dipping. which means he could have signed for anything up to the 6.5 and it would only be a credit to the jags now they get 1 mill credit lol.

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#82

(03-20-2019, 01:24 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 01:02 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: He’s not actually getting an extra million.

Right no double dipping. which means he could have signed for anything up to the 6.5 and it would only be a credit to the jags now they get 1 mill credit lol.

I wonder if he signed for that little to stick it to the Jags for cutting him?
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSIM9bZmkezB9B4qD2qAtT...IGQHCZIPuA]
Reply

#83

(03-20-2019, 01:49 PM)Dimson Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 01:24 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: Right no double dipping. which means he could have signed for anything up to the 6.5 and it would only be a credit to the jags now they get 1 mill credit lol.

I wonder if he signed for that little to stick it to the Jags for cutting him?

Covered on prior page of the thread. 

(short answer is "no" IMO  - it was just the way the Jags guarantee made it play out)
Reply

#84

(03-20-2019, 12:26 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 12:07 PM)JackCity Wrote: Not where he signed, how he signed.  

I've already said that's not what his market value would be but as you thoroughly explained with him the offsets he was getting 6.5 regardless , nobody was gonna pay over that for 2019. 

He chose the best fit for him with a contending team he has personal relationships with and also happens to be near where he trains every summer + has a offensive hotshot HC who can develop him (if at all possible). GM of the rams is best pals with David Caldwell too. I don't think any sticking it to the Jags narrative applies

He could do what you mention above for the reasons you mention and could have done it under a completely different type of deal.  He’s taking on some risk here with a 1 year deal that he probably didn’t have to take on if he didn’t want to.

I’m not telling you what I think is in his mind, but he did hang us with the bill and decided to shoulder additional risk in the process.  At face value, his new deal stuck it to the Jags.  No need to speculate on his thinking or whether he was taking any level of personal satisfaction in it which is what I think you’re really arguing against.

What scenario was there that him signing with a new team wouldn't have "stuck us" considering nobody was gonna pay anything with the offset. If Bortles took a 2 year deal with a 1 million cap hit year 2 and 4 million year 2 would that have impacted our credit for next year at all?
Reply

#85

(03-20-2019, 01:55 PM)JackCity Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 12:26 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: He could do what you mention above for the reasons you mention and could have done it under a completely different type of deal.  He’s taking on some risk here with a 1 year deal that he probably didn’t have to take on if he didn’t want to.

I’m not telling you what I think is in his mind, but he did hang us with the bill and decided to shoulder additional risk in the process.  At face value, his new deal stuck it to the Jags.  No need to speculate on his thinking or whether he was taking any level of personal satisfaction in it which is what I think you’re really arguing against.

What scenario was there that him signing with a new team wouldn't have "stuck us" considering nobody was gonna pay anything with the offset. If Bortles took a 2 year deal with a 1 million cap hit year 2 and 4 million year 2 would that have impacted our credit for next year at all?

Your scenario (I am assuming you meant $1 million in year 1) would be absolutely the same for the Jags, a $1 million cap credit in 2020.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#86
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2019, 03:05 PM by Jaguarmeister.)

(03-20-2019, 01:55 PM)JackCity Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 12:26 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: He could do what you mention above for the reasons you mention and could have done it under a completely different type of deal.  He’s taking on some risk here with a 1 year deal that he probably didn’t have to take on if he didn’t want to.

I’m not telling you what I think is in his mind, but he did hang us with the bill and decided to shoulder additional risk in the process.  At face value, his new deal stuck it to the Jags.  No need to speculate on his thinking or whether he was taking any level of personal satisfaction in it which is what I think you’re really arguing against.

What scenario was there that him signing with a new team wouldn't have "stuck us" considering nobody was gonna pay anything with the offset. If Bortles took a 2 year deal with a 1 million cap hit year 2 and 4 million year 2 would that have impacted our credit for next year at all?

You can front load contracts or spread them relatively evenly over the life of the contract.  You can't back load them the way you've illustrated above.  Not only that but your example offers less than $6.5 million so it's not something to hold up as an alternative.

Ultimately, if you agree he could have negotiated a multi year deal then we can continue the back and forth here.  If you think he couldn't have gotten a 2 year deal or more with more than $6.5 million in guarantees then that's where our opinions of the situation separate and debating positions that stem from that point is, well, pointless. If you don't think he could've gotten a multi year deal had he wanted one, I can see why you'd reach the conlusion you've reached.
Reply

#87

(03-20-2019, 02:20 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 01:55 PM)JackCity Wrote: What scenario was there that him signing with a new team wouldn't have "stuck us" considering nobody was gonna pay anything with the offset. If Bortles took a 2 year deal with a 1 million cap hit year 2 and 4 million year 2 would that have impacted our credit for next year at all?

You can front load contracts or spread them relatively evenly over the life of the contract.  You can't back load them the way you've illustrated above.  Not only that but your example offers less than $6.5 million so it's not something to hold up as an alternative.

Ultimately, if you agree he could have negotiated a multi year deal then we can continue the back and forth here.  If you think he couldn't have gotten a 2 year deal or more with more than $6.5 million in guarantees then that's where our opinions of the situation separate and debating positions that stem from that point is, well, pointless.  If you don't think he could've gotten a multi year deal had he wanted one, I can see why you'd reach the conlusion you've reached.

 I think Blake could definitely have got a multi year deal but I was wondering if our cap credit is based on how much he's earning in 2019 or the total of that new contract he gets. So for example if he signed with the Ravens on a 3 deal is our cap credit for 2019 just based off how much he's paid that year or the total guarantees of the contract? Cap isn't my strong point as you may have noticed so just trying to understand your perspective
Reply

#88

(03-20-2019, 03:29 PM)JackCity Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 02:20 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: You can front load contracts or spread them relatively evenly over the life of the contract.  You can't back load them the way you've illustrated above.  Not only that but your example offers less than $6.5 million so it's not something to hold up as an alternative.

Ultimately, if you agree he could have negotiated a multi year deal then we can continue the back and forth here.  If you think he couldn't have gotten a 2 year deal or more with more than $6.5 million in guarantees then that's where our opinions of the situation separate and debating positions that stem from that point is, well, pointless.  If you don't think he could've gotten a multi year deal had he wanted one, I can see why you'd reach the conlusion you've reached.

 I think Blake could definitely have got a multi year deal but I was wondering if our cap credit is based on how much he's earning in 2019 or the total of that new contract he gets. So for example if he signed with the Ravens on a 3 deal is our cap credit for 2019 just based off how much he's paid that year or the total guarantees of the contract? Cap isn't my strong point as you may have noticed so just trying to understand your perspective

The guaranteed $6.5 million was for 2019 so I would imagine that only money earned in 2019 would be able to offset it.
Reply

#89

(03-20-2019, 03:29 PM)JackCity Wrote:
(03-20-2019, 02:20 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: You can front load contracts or spread them relatively evenly over the life of the contract.  You can't back load them the way you've illustrated above.  Not only that but your example offers less than $6.5 million so it's not something to hold up as an alternative.

Ultimately, if you agree he could have negotiated a multi year deal then we can continue the back and forth here.  If you think he couldn't have gotten a 2 year deal or more with more than $6.5 million in guarantees then that's where our opinions of the situation separate and debating positions that stem from that point is, well, pointless.  If you don't think he could've gotten a multi year deal had he wanted one, I can see why you'd reach the conlusion you've reached.

 I think Blake could definitely have got a multi year deal but I was wondering if our cap credit is based on how much he's earning in 2019 or the total of that new contract he gets. So for example if he signed with the Ravens on a 3 deal is our cap credit for 2019 just based off how much he's paid that year or the total guarantees of the contract? Cap isn't my strong point as you may have noticed so just trying to understand your perspective

It's any money earned in 2019 including signing bonus which would all have been paid in 2019 even though it's amortized over the duration of the contract.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#90

The league minimum for a player with his experience is 8- something. What’s a million dollars worth after taxes in California?

Reply

#91

(03-21-2019, 02:25 PM)Section105Fan Wrote: The league minimum for a player with his experience is 8- something. What’s a million dollars worth after taxes in California?


Haha, probably half that amount. Touché.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply

#92

Interesting comment from Bortles. Sort of a slap at the quality of coaching he thinks he received here in Jax..........

From NFL.com..........

“Bortles told the Los Angeles Times recently that Sean McVay and the Rams' coaching staff is unlike any he encountered with the Jaguars.”

Reply

#93

(06-06-2019, 11:30 AM)Section105Fan Wrote: Interesting comment from Bortles. Sort of a slap at the quality of coaching he thinks he received here in Jax..........

From NFL.com..........

“Bortles told the Los Angeles Times recently that Sean McVay and the Rams' coaching staff is unlike any he encountered with the Jaguars.”

What he said was NOT a "slap at the quality of coaching" here in Jacksonville, rather it was more about praise for McVay and his staff with his new team.  There is nothing wrong with what he said.  What is wrong is how it was editorialized.  He never once mentioned the Jaguars' coaching staff.


Here is the entire quote for context.

Quote:Bortles told the Los Angeles Times recently that Sean McVay and the Rams' coaching staff is unlike any he encountered with the Jaguars.

"Seeing how he coaches, how all the other coaches coach and how the guys are receptive and take it, I've never seen anything like it," Bortles said.



There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#94
(This post was last modified: 06-06-2019, 08:22 PM by Section105Fan.)

(06-06-2019, 01:11 PM)jagibelieve Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 11:30 AM)Section105Fan Wrote: Interesting comment from Bortles. Sort of a slap at the quality of coaching he thinks he received here in Jax..........

From NFL.com..........

“Bortles told the Los Angeles Times recently that Sean McVay and the Rams' coaching staff is unlike any he encountered with the Jaguars.”

What he said was NOT a "slap at the quality of coaching" here in Jacksonville, rather it was more about praise for McVay and his staff with his new team.  There is nothing wrong with what he said.  What is wrong is how it was editorialized.  He never once mentioned the Jaguars' coaching staff.


Here is the entire quote for context.

Quote:Bortles told the Los Angeles Times recently that Sean McVay and the Rams' coaching staff is unlike any he encountered with the Jaguars.

"Seeing how he coaches, how all the other coaches coach and how the guys are receptive and take it, I've never seen anything like it," Bortles said.

I disagree. It was a subtle criticism. No, he didn’t mention the Jags coaching staff directly, but he didn’t need to. The implication was clear that if he had received the quality of coaching he’s experiencing with the Rams, things would have been different with the Jags. Apparently I’m not alone with this interpretation. Read the following article from The Sports Daily..........

“Blake Bortles takes a shot at Jaguars coaching staff”

Reply

#95

"I've never seen anything like it"
He didn't say better or worse.
He mentioned the behavior of the players (saying how receptive they are) and the coaches.
He didn't say more receptive or less receptive.
He was asked to give a quote for the media and he gave one.
I can't recall a time when he blamed anyone else for how his career has gone, or how a particular game went.
I don't think he's going to start now, even if the LA media wants him to.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#96
(This post was last modified: 06-07-2019, 07:20 AM by RicoTx.)

(06-06-2019, 07:11 PM)Section105Fan Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 01:11 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: What he said was NOT a "slap at the quality of coaching" here in Jacksonville, rather it was more about praise for McVay and his staff with his new team.  There is nothing wrong with what he said.  What is wrong is how it was editorialized.  He never once mentioned the Jaguars' coaching staff.


Here is the entire quote for context.

I disagree. It was a subtle criticism. No, he didn’t mention the Jags coaching staff directly, but he didn’t need to. The implication was clear that if he had received the quality of coaching he’s experiencing with the Rams, things would have been different with the Jags. Apparently I’m not alone with this interpretation. Read the following article from The Sports Daily..........

“Blake Bortles takes a shot at Jaguars coaching staff”

You certainly are reading a lot into it what was never said.
[Image: IMG-2758.jpg]
Reply

#97

(06-06-2019, 09:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: "I've never seen anything like it"
He didn't say better or worse.
He mentioned the behavior of the players (saying how receptive they are) and the coaches.
He didn't say more receptive or less receptive.
He was asked to give a quote for the media and he gave one.
I can't recall a time when he blamed anyone else for how his career has gone, or how a particular game went.  
I don't think he's going to start now, even if the LA media wants him to.

The only way Bortles acts unprofessionally is when the media writes the Copy for him.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#98

(06-06-2019, 07:11 PM)Section105Fan Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 01:11 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: What he said was NOT a "slap at the quality of coaching" here in Jacksonville, rather it was more about praise for McVay and his staff with his new team.  There is nothing wrong with what he said.  What is wrong is how it was editorialized.  He never once mentioned the Jaguars' coaching staff.


Here is the entire quote for context.

I disagree. It was a subtle criticism. No, he didn’t mention the Jags coaching staff directly, but he didn’t need to. The implication was clear that if he had received the quality of coaching he’s experiencing with the Rams, things would have been different with the Jags. Apparently I’m not alone with this interpretation. Read the following article from The Sports Daily..........

“Blake Bortles takes a shot at Jaguars coaching staff”

Personally, I read more into the line about how players 'are receptive and take [coaching]'. We all know there was bad juju in the RB room, both in coaching and in attitudes of the players, and I have to imagine that set the tone for a lot of other position groups as well.
Reply

#99

(06-07-2019, 06:46 AM)Rico Wrote:
(06-06-2019, 07:11 PM)Section105Fan Wrote: I disagree. It was a subtle criticism. No, he didn’t mention the Jags coaching staff directly, but he didn’t need to. The implication was clear that if he had received the quality of coaching he’s experiencing with the Rams, things would have been different with the Jags. Apparently I’m not alone with this interpretation. Read the following article from The Sports Daily..........

“Blake Bortles takes a shot at Jaguars coaching staff”

You certainly are reading a lot into it what was never said.

Yep, it’s called “ reading between the lines “. It’s Bortles’ way of leveling criticism at the Jags without actually saying it directly.

Reply


(06-07-2019, 09:00 AM)Section105Fan Wrote:
(06-07-2019, 06:46 AM)Rico Wrote: You certainly are reading a lot into it what was never said.

Yep, it’s called “ reading between the lines “. It’s Bortles’ way of leveling criticism at the Jags without actually saying it directly.

You're really stretching.  Sorry, I don't see it and I don't see anyone else that does.  But hey, to each their own.
[Image: IMG-2758.jpg]
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!