https://www.profootballrumors.com/2018/0...-extension

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/...4767787008

---

I heard 4 year extension with $125 mil in guarantees.

$80mil of which will pay by next March, according to James Jones.

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

That ish cray...

Sure hope they can keep some semblance of a team around him with that kind of ched going out.
It's gonna be the Rodgers and Adams show.... they'll forever lack OL, DL, LB, DBs, and RBs lol

Imagine how many championships they could have already had if they had been more aggressive in free agency in years prior and not had so much $ tied up in QBs and WRs.

---

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/...3763119106

---

This is how teams go to ground. They pay ridiculous amounts of money to key players and the rest of the team is crap and they end up with losing seasons. The last visas it takes a 53 man roster to make a team to play the game.

---

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/...3763119106

We all know Bortles isn't close to the level of QB that Rodgers is, but give me a team and Bortles with his contract all day, over no team and Rodgers with that contract.

---

Surely we've all come to the conclusion by now that this contract is in direct response to Rodgers' inclusion on the Ramsey "doesn't suck" list.

---

We all know Bortles isn't close to the level of QB that Rodgers is, but give me a team and Bortles with his contract all day, over no team and Rodgers with that contract.

Umm, Bortles' cap hits are 10, 21, and 23 million. Rodgers is 20, 26, 32, 33.

You're basically saying you'd rather have Bortles, Moncrief, and Hayden over Rodgers. Pretty silly IMO.

---

We all know Bortles isn't close to the level of QB that Rodgers is, but give me a team and Bortles with his contract all day, over no team and Rodgers with that contract.

Umm, Bortles' cap hits are 10, 21, and 23 million. Rodgers is 20, 26, 32, 33.

You're basically saying you'd rather have Bortles, Moncrief, and Hayden over Rodgers. Pretty silly IMO.

26 mil guaranteed versus 99 mil guaranteed is a cavernous divide -  Pretty bad comparison. 

Bortles contract also has an out prior to the third year if he's not earning it. The Jags can save 18 mil by parting ways with Blake at the end of 2019. 

Hayden's contract has a similar out clause and Moncrief is one year deal.  You're stretching by comparing these investments.

---

Umm, Bortles' cap hits are 10, 21, and 23 million. Rodgers is 20, 26, 32, 33.

You're basically saying you'd rather have Bortles, Moncrief, and Hayden over Rodgers. Pretty silly IMO.

26 mil guaranteed versus 99 mil guaranteed is a cavernous divide -  Pretty bad comparison. 

Bortles contract also has an out prior to the third year if he's not earning it. The Jags can save 18 mil by parting ways with Blake at the end of 2019. 

Hayden's contract has a similar out clause and Moncrief is one year deal.  You're stretching by comparing these investments.

Well if Bortles isn't earning it then all the more reason we'd rather be paying the right QB even if it is a lot more.

---

26 mil guaranteed versus 99 mil guaranteed is a cavernous divide -  Pretty bad comparison. 

Bortles contract also has an out prior to the third year if he's not earning it.  The Jags can save 18 mil by parting ways with Blake at the end of 2019. 

Hayden's contract has a similar out clause and Moncrief is one year deal.  You're stretching by comparing these investments.

Well if Bortles isn't earning it then all the more reason we'd rather be paying the right QB even if it is a lot more.

I must have missed that offer we received to sign Aaron Rodgers. When did that happen exactly?

The Bortles contract was a smart way to manage what talent was available. Not drafting a better QB is the only gripe I'd have. I thought they might have taken a shot on a few guys that have come out the past three years. 
I don't think they did poorly with these contracts though, and I know comparing them to the Packers situation is a very apples and oranges scenario.

---

Well if Bortles isn't earning it then all the more reason we'd rather be paying the right QB even if it is a lot more.

I must have missed that offer we received to sign Aaron Rodgers. When did that happen exactly?

In the hypothetical world where the other dude said he'd rather have Bortles + ~10 AAV cap to spend than Rodgers.

---

I must have missed that offer we received to sign Aaron Rodgers. When did that happen exactly?

In the hypothetical world where the other dude said he'd rather have Bortles + ~10 AAV cap to spend than Rodgers.

That's not what he said. Go back and check the "team vs no team part."  You're conveniently ignoring the Jags defense and the ability to keep the young core of it that Bortles contract was designed to allow.

---

In the hypothetical world where the other dude said he'd rather have Bortles + ~10 AAV cap to spend than Rodgers.

That's not what he said. Go back and check the "team vs no team part."  You're conveniently ignoring the Jags defense and the ability to keep the young core of it that Bortles contract was designed to allow.

Nope I saw that, and I looked at the difference in salary and inserted two recent FA players who equaled that difference (and I actually greatly overestimated the difference since they equal like 18 million). Maybe it's his fault for thinking that ~10 mil AAV difference is "team vs no team" and not one good player or like 2/3 of a really good player.

---

That's not what he said. Go back and check the "team vs no team part."  You're conveniently ignoring the Jags defense and the ability to keep the young core of it that Bortles contract was designed to allow.

Nope I saw that, and I looked at the difference in salary and inserted two recent FA players who equaled that difference (and I actually greatly overestimated the difference since they equal like 18 million). Maybe it's his fault for thinking that ~10 mil AAV difference is "team vs no team" and not one good player or like 2/3 of a really good player.

You saw that... and ignored it. Still ignoring it.  What are you going to do with Ngakoue, Ramsey and Jack in 2020 when you owe Aaron Rodgers 34 million while trying to re-sign them?  Jags are free to be onto a rookie QB contract at that point.

---

Nope I saw that, and I looked at the difference in salary and inserted two recent FA players who equaled that difference (and I actually greatly overestimated the difference since they equal like 18 million). Maybe it's his fault for thinking that ~10 mil AAV difference is "team vs no team" and not one good player or like 2/3 of a really good player.

You saw that... and ignored it. Still ignoring it.  What are you going to do with Ngakoue, Ramsey and Jack in 2020 when you owe Aaron Rodgers 34 million while trying to re-sign them?  Jags are free to be onto a rookie QB contract at that point.

He said Bortles vs Rodgers was "team vs no team". You are saying rookie QB vs Rodgers. We'll be able to keep our young stars either way. We might not be filling them in with as good of players compared to a rookie deal QB, or we would be filling them in with almost exactly as good of players if we still have Bortles. Either way, having one of the most elite QBs in the game is better than unproven rookie + 3 good players or average QB + one good player.

---

You saw that... and ignored it. Still ignoring it.  What are you going to do with Ngakoue, Ramsey and Jack in 2020 when you owe Aaron Rodgers 34 million while trying to re-sign them?  Jags are free to be onto a rookie QB contract at that point.

He said Bortles vs Rodgers was "team vs no team". You are saying rookie QB vs Rodgers. We'll be able to keep our young stars either way. We might not be filling them in with as good of players compared to a rookie deal QB, or we would be filling them in with almost exactly as good of players if we still have Bortles. Either way, having one of the most elite QBs in the game is better than unproven rookie + 3 good players or average QB + one good player.

I interpreted it as:  rather having Bortles and a good team around him (including a sustainable championship defense) - opposed to over-investing/committing to Rodgers but giving up that sustainability. 

Rodgers' deal would dismantle the Jags defense in 2020 and that is why I'd take Bortles right now over Rodgers at that $99 million price. This defense gives us a chance to win with a mid-tier quarterback. I'm all about keeping that kind of defense in place as long as possible.

---

He said Bortles vs Rodgers was "team vs no team". You are saying rookie QB vs Rodgers. We'll be able to keep our young stars either way. We might not be filling them in with as good of players compared to a rookie deal QB, or we would be filling them in with almost exactly as good of players if we still have Bortles. Either way, having one of the most elite QBs in the game is better than unproven rookie + 3 good players or average QB + one good player.

I interpreted it as:  rather having Bortles and a good team around him (including a sustainable championship defense) - opposed to over-investing/committing to Rodgers but giving up that sustainability. 

Rodgers' deal would dismantle the Jags defense in 2020 and that is why I'd take Bortles right now over Rodgers at that $99 million price. This defense gives us a chance to win with a mid-tier quarterback. I'm all about keeping that kind of defense in place as long as possible.

Not that I disagree but playing devil's advocate, isn't there a compelling argument that defense can win a championship but a top 3 qb can win you multiple championships.

Last year was amazing it's a blast having a big nasty defense! But in the grand scheme keeping the gang together and paid is a tall order. What if Ramsey doesn't want to stay in Jax and chases the bigger market? What if we let Fowler walk and then Yannick gets hurt? What if Bryan isn't the replacement for Campbell and he leaves a massive void in our dline at retirement? One or two moving pieces is out of place and that big nasty defense has some glarring weaknesses. As to where a top tier QB can solve an average defenses by scoring on demand, makes average WR better, gets ride of the ball fast enough you don't need the wall of China for an oline. It's how the Patriots have done it for a decade, it's how the clots did it, for every defense that wins a championship there's 3 teams that did it with elite QB play. Now the 100 million dollar question is Rogers that QB?

---

He said Bortles vs Rodgers was "team vs no team". You are saying rookie QB vs Rodgers. We'll be able to keep our young stars either way. We might not be filling them in with as good of players compared to a rookie deal QB, or we would be filling them in with almost exactly as good of players if we still have Bortles. Either way, having one of the most elite QBs in the game is better than unproven rookie + 3 good players or average QB + one good player.

I interpreted it as:  rather having Bortles and a good team around him (including a sustainable championship defense) - opposed to over-investing/committing to Rodgers but giving up that sustainability. 

Rodgers' deal would dismantle the Jags defense in 2020 and that is why I'd take Bortles right now over Rodgers at that $99 million price. This defense gives us a chance to win with a mid-tier quarterback. I'm all about keeping that kind of defense in place as long as possible.

I'm saying there is no real difference in supporting cast between Bortles or Rodgers. One good player, not even a really good player. Now if Bortles fails to win us a ring and we are going back to a rookie QB as you suggested then there is more flexibility to keep building a supporting cast...but that's 2-3 years down the road and we're screwed regardless.

---

I interpreted it as:  rather having Bortles and a good team around him (including a sustainable championship defense) - opposed to over-investing/committing to Rodgers but giving up that sustainability. 

Rodgers' deal would dismantle the Jags defense in 2020 and that is why I'd take Bortles right now over Rodgers at that $99 million price. This defense gives us a chance to win with a mid-tier quarterback. I'm all about keeping that kind of defense in place as long as possible.

I'm saying there is no real difference in supporting cast between Bortles or Rodgers. One good player, not even a really good player. Now if Bortles fails to win us a ring and we are going back to a rookie QB as you suggested then there is more flexibility to keep building a supporting cast...but that's 2-3 years down the road and we're screwed regardless.

I don't understand your first sentence.  Are you saying there's "no real difference" between the #2 defense in the league and the #22 defense in the league?

---