(12-20-2017, 08:54 PM)Jags02 Wrote:

(12-20-2017, 01:36 PM)Kane Wrote: Jackson or Mayfield?
Bro... this ain't 2015, we won't be drafting high enough to get those guys.
Best case scenario, imo, would be a massive trade from 20 something to the teens for a worthy QB and even still...he's a rookie coming from a non traditional college offense.

The team realistically has 2 options, play Bortles at 19 mil or extend him. Cutting him just isn't happening after his sudden turnaround. Even if you're weary of setbacks the team has invested so much time into him I just don't see them cutting him.

I'd prefer they play him at 19 mil for one season. Yeah it's a lot of cash but if he regresses, it's a one and done. An extension, even if it gets down to 14-15 mil per year, Hell even if he takes a discount for 12-13... likely includes more guarantees than 19 mil over the course of the contract.
Bortles has no reason to take a discount though. He can play hardball if he keeps playing well and accept no less than the 19. If he bets on himself and wins, 19 mil will be a drop in the bucket on what he gets the next year. If he loses, he earns 19 mil and likely still gets a contract around 10 mil a year or more from someone else the following season.

Trading Bortles with his 19 mil for one year isn't an option. Extending him and then trading him makes even less sense really.
So a scenario where Bortles is not on the roster would HAVE to be breaking the bank on a FA (which options are even more slim than what was perceived at the beginning of the year) and drafting a QB OR drafting a QB in round 1, with a trade up to get a QB worthy of starting day one, and a cheap veteran back up, which looking at contracts everyone south of 10 mil is pretty much going to be 2016 Bortles or worse.

I'd be willing to bet they can save a little...even if it's only $1 mil per...off his $19 mil pricetag with an extension. I'm thinking 3-years for $51 to $54 mil possibly in a backloaded deal that saves even more off his cap hit for 2018. 

He won't sign that deal. 

If he plays as well as we hope he will for the rest of the season, if he's "good Blake," then he will want and deserve a lot more than that, based on market value.   And if he reverts to "bad Blake," I would want someone else.  

So there's no in-between here, where he performs well, and yet we get him on the cheap.   That's not going to happen.

---