The only reason?  No.  

A huge reason?  Absolutely.  When Hill, Adams, Diggs, Kupp, Brown etc. seen what Kirk got their eyes lit up.

Meh

Their eyes can light up all they want. Doesn't mean they have much traction when negotiating against Kirk's deal structure which is incredibly team friendly. Those players did not sign team friendly deals like Kirk. They really don't compare. 

More importantly - if so many are hell-bent on insisting that the Jags/Kirk deal shifted the market - why are they not critical of the Mike Williams deal that happened A WEEK PRIOR to the Kirk signing??

Williams got 40 million guaranteed with 28 million up front at signing. 
Kirk got 37 million guaranteed with 22.5 mil up front. 

I'm just not buying it. Kirk got paid more than receivers with his production tend to get paid. He also was the best thing a desperate team could find in free agency in a year they had tons of cap space. 
This kind of thing happens every free agency with some rebuilding team overpaying for a need while they had cap room. 
It just rarely turns out that two or three talking heads single it out as a "market influencing deal" and get ppl up in arms about it. 

The market is what it is. Teams and agents negotiate. An outlier deal has less influence than folks are letting on. 
If I was in negotiation with a top tier WR agent that wanted 100mil with 65 guaranteed and no out clause and they were citing the Kirk deal as precedent, I'd say "Sure - we'll just put in a two year out clause and make it 50 mil guaranteed if you like Kirk's deal so much."  If GMs are letting agents bully them on price, that is their own failure. Not the Jaguars shifting the market. 
Those teams wanted those receivers and were willing to pay what they paid for them. 

You can't just compare straight up annual base salaries without weighing those numbers against deal structure. 
It's a major factor.

Because Williams was worth his contract.  Hes a 6'4 220 lb. WR, National champion, top 10 pick that can be a number 1 on a lot of teams.  It wasnt just 2 or 3 talking heads that thought Kirk helped set the WR market lol.  None of these big named WRs wanted out until they seen what Kirk got and then they wanted the big bag and the their teams didnt have the money or didnt want to pay a WR 30 mil.  Kirk was signed on potential and what they think he can do pretty much like how the drafted Walker at 1.  Hopefully Kirk can live up to the contract and even make it look like a steal.

---

I don't disagree with any of this, but have two points:

I don't think we broke the market at all. I think that is a crap narrative coming from one front office guy supposedly complaining to a writer who desperately needed something to write about. 

If a front office is incapable of negotiating a fair deal with a top tier receiver - and they blame it on a guy we gave only 50% guaranteed money to with a two year out,  they just suck at negotiating. Tyreek Hill didn't get paid his number because of Christian freaking Kirk. Not buying that.

Did we push up the second tier receiver threshold a bit by paying him around 18 or 19 per year for 2 years? 
Sure. A little. But only for those doing similarly structured deals. 
I just don't think it's fair or accurate to say that a guy on an incentive laden 2 year deal with the POSSIBILITY for it to become a 4 year payday is a worthy measuring stick. Seems like weak sauce. 
If there's a receiver on the market rated exactly like Kirk and a team gave him a 4 year deal with no out clause, with more guaranteed $ percentage and fewer incentives required, they absolutely would NOT have to match Kirks per year number on his 1st 2 years.

Chark wanted out. (IMO) The Meyer Error ruined him on Jacksonville. He was ready for a change. 
I don''t know what this regime offered him, but I can't imagine they wouldn't match that sum the Lions mustered. 
I'm very disappointed we didn't find a way to keep him around.

I know we've had this conversation before, but I want to remain on record as disagreeing.  Chark never said he wanted out and I see little to no evidence to suggest that he did.  Why would he?

Urban Meyer?  He's no longer the coach.

Trent Baalke?  If the Jaguars hypothetically outbid every other NFL team as you theorize, I find it hard to believe Chark would be upset at Baalke.

To play for a winner?  He signed with the 3-13-1 Detroit Lions.  

He didn't like Trevor Lawrence?  He was seen working out with Lawrence just days before signing with Detroit.  It also suggests that he was open to returning to the Jaguars.

He just wanted to live in Detroit?  Seems unlikely for someone who was born in the south, always lived in the south and chose to go to college in the south.  


There's also no evidence that the Jaguars offered him a better deal.  Agents make a living based upon their reputation for getting their clients the best deals.  If Chark got a better deal from a team other than Detroit, his agent would want the whole world to know.  He's not going to keep it a secret.  While I personally think Chark would have been a good value, it is not that hard to imagine the Jaguars didn't offer more considering that 30 other NFL teams also did not offer more.  I'm not sure if it was his injury history or what, but NFL teams clearly didn't value Chark as much as some of us fans.

I don't claim to know how it went down. 

But it makes little sense to me that they wouldn't make enough of an offer to keep him around.
Pederson announced in a presser they were working to get him resigned. 

I couple that with the fact that we've literally had four players in the past 5 years say they wanted to ay somewhere else and wanted out of Jax,  and i arrive at my humble opinion that he wanted a change. 

I've learned that getting inside the head of young pro athletes is not as cut and dry as you'd think. 
He could have several reasons to want a change of scenery that make sense to him and I think are silly. 

Maybe one day we'll know more. 

Just speculating now. 

Wish he was a jag either way

---

Kirk definitely set the WR market.  The way Ballke did the contract is much better than when originally seen the numbers.  After all these guys that has gotten big deals this off season makes the Kirk contract much better.  I say he goes for 1080 yards this season

The only market he set or inflated was the "second tier receiver on a short term deal" market. 

You think the dolphins paid Tyreek Hill 72 mil guaranteed with 120 mil potential earnings and 52 mil UP FRONT, because Kirk got $37 mil guaranteed? 

Bruh, it's apples and oranges. Both the players, and the terms of the contracts. One did not influence the other.

From the way things sound, I think the Packers were going to move on from Davante regardless...but I think that Tyreek would still be a Chief and AJ Brown would still be a Titan if we didn't sign Kirk. He absolutely raised both of those guys deals by mid 7 figures a year. Kirk also has a lot to do with Deebo and Metcalf's strained relationships with their teams.

---

The only market he set or inflated was the "second tier receiver on a short term deal" market. 

You think the dolphins paid Tyreek Hill 72 mil guaranteed with 120 mil potential earnings and 52 mil UP FRONT, because Kirk got $37 mil guaranteed? 

Bruh, it's apples and oranges. Both the players, and the terms of the contracts. One did not influence the other.

From the way things sound, I think the Packers were going to move on from Davante regardless...but I think that Tyreek would still be a Chief and AJ Brown would still be a Titan if we didn't sign Kirk. He absolutely raised both of those guys deals by mid 7 figures a year. Kirk also has a lot to do with Deebo and Metcalf's strained relationships with their teams.

LOL

i think all of that is pure fantasy

---

That narrative of Kirk's deal altering the market is either total horse [BLEEP], or front offices have become horrible negotiators.

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Ahhh. It's all the Jags fault. The other GM's are whining. Why? ... well, we signed Kirk. A few GM's had him targeted and didn't get him. (sour grapes) A few others had to deal with agents bringing up his contract for their guys. A few receivers got an attitude and wanted more from their current team. AND last but not least it was Baalke and the Jags.

My take is we didn't overpay for him. Let's say we get half the production from him compared to Tyreek Hill or Adams. They make 30/28 million a year. he is getting 18. Now some of you will say with this he should get 14/15 million so over paid. The way I look at it is a risk reward ratio. The premium he is earning is due to him taking the career risk by coming to the Jags. (who have been a dumpster fire the last 10 years) I know we appear to have things moving our way , but until we win more games that is smoke and mirrors. I am thankful he took the chance on us.

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

That narrative of Kirk's deal altering the market is either total horse [BLEEP], or front offices have become horrible negotiators.

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

---

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

Regarding 1 & 3, could those two contracts combined create the trend that bumps up the market?

As for 4, that's the way a lot of these deals come to fruition.

I'm not sure too many people would have had a problem with the Jaguars trading the 5th round pick for Amari Cooper.  His deal reportedly is $2 million more per year than Kirks.  But with Cooper, he's a proven starter and has been a Pro Bowler.  He's averaged about 74 catches a year over the course of his career, and while older than Kirk, is still in his prime at 28.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

1.  Williams and Kirk are 2 totally different players lol.   Williams is a deal I would call a team friendly deal.  1 is a guy that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams and the other is a good slot WR.  Can Kirk improve on the outside? Hopefully, but his deal is based on what they are hoping he can do not on what he has done.

---

The only market he set or inflated was the "second tier receiver on a short term deal" market. 

You think the dolphins paid Tyreek Hill 72 mil guaranteed with 120 mil potential earnings and 52 mil UP FRONT, because Kirk got $37 mil guaranteed? 

Bruh, it's apples and oranges. Both the players, and the terms of the contracts. One did not influence the other.

From the way things sound, I think the Packers were going to move on from Davante regardless...but I think that Tyreek would still be a Chief and AJ Brown would still be a Titan if we didn't sign Kirk. He absolutely raised both of those guys deals by mid 7 figures a year. Kirk also has a lot to do with Deebo and Metcalf's strained relationships with their teams.

Yup, agreed

---

The only market he set or inflated was the "second tier receiver on a short term deal" market. 

You think the dolphins paid Tyreek Hill 72 mil guaranteed with 120 mil potential earnings and 52 mil UP FRONT, because Kirk got $37 mil guaranteed? 

Bruh, it's apples and oranges. Both the players, and the terms of the contracts. One did not influence the other.

From the way things sound, I think the Packers were going to move on from Davante regardless...but I think that Tyreek would still be a Chief and AJ Brown would still be a Titan if we didn't sign Kirk. He absolutely raised both of those guys deals by mid 7 figures a year. Kirk also has a lot to do with Deebo and Metcalf's strained relationships with their teams.

Yup, agreed

---

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

1.  Williams and Kirk are 2 totally different players lol.   Williams is a deal I would call a team friendly deal.  1 is a guy that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams and the other is a good slot WR.  Can Kirk improve on the outside? Hopefully, but his deal is based on what they are hoping he can do not on what he has done.

---

Agreed completely Williams and Kirk are two entirely different types of player.  Yet their production is eeerily similar, with Kirk actually having more catches in one fewer year than Williams, with the base salary some $2 million a year less than Williams deal.  NYC Jags has a point about that Williams deal.  If the production is very similar, why castigate the Jaguars for signing a lesser deal than Williams got with the Chargers?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

1.  Williams and Kirk are 2 totally different players lol.   Williams is a deal I would call a team friendly deal.  1 is a guy that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams and the other is a good slot WR.  Can Kirk improve on the outside? Hopefully, but his deal is based on what they are hoping he can do not on what he has done.

You're the same guy that spent two pages defending the Kirk deal based on his production and our lack of production at his position, plus quoting slot receiver stats to justify it RIGHT??

I'll post your words here if that's what you really want. 
I doubt you do, since you're now talking out of both sides of your mouth. 

The whole slot vs outside thing is kind of a joke at this point - and anyone who has broken down successful offenses in the past ten years has seen multiple teams win with slot production over X and Z. Of course the ideal is having a #1 guy at X, but in the same way 32 teams don't have a franchise QB, many have to find a way without an elite X until it comes around for them.

---

The only reason?  No.  

A huge reason?  Absolutely.  When Hill, Adams, Diggs, Kupp, Brown etc. seen what Kirk got their eyes lit up.

Adams was wanting 30m per year long before the Kirk deal was ever a thought.

Y'all are wasting keystrokes.

---

The only market he set or inflated was the "second tier receiver on a short term deal" market. 

You think the dolphins paid Tyreek Hill 72 mil guaranteed with 120 mil potential earnings and 52 mil UP FRONT, because Kirk got $37 mil guaranteed? 

Bruh, it's apples and oranges. Both the players, and the terms of the contracts. One did not influence the other.

From the way things sound, I think the Packers were going to move on from Davante regardless...but I think that Tyreek would still be a Chief and AJ Brown would still be a Titan if we didn't sign Kirk. He absolutely raised both of those guys deals by mid 7 figures a year. Kirk also has a lot to do with Deebo and Metcalf's strained relationships with their teams.

first, flag this post for insufficient tacks spite.

second, both those moves made two of the top teams in this conference weaker, so I fail to see how we see Kirk's deal as bad in this aspect.

Deebo and Metcalf were headed down this road before the season even ended. It's all part of the dance, relationships are strained, players and coaches don't see eye to eye, then one day a contract is signed and everyone is best buds all over again.

---

That narrative of Kirk's deal altering the market is either total horse [BLEEP], or front offices have become horrible negotiators.

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

...I see it being that agents and GMs communicate. If the writing is on the wall that this top WR is going to be looking for $50M in guarantees or $30m per year average, a lot of the negotiations are going to be working from there, if everyone assumes that top player is going to get that kind of money. Doesn't mean that top WR has to be the first signing of the season. 

If your neighbor puts their house on the market at $300K and you think they'll be getting offers around that, you wouldn't put your house on the market for $220K, even if it was not quite as updated as the next door place, would you? Your neighbor may not have a deal in hand yet, but if you know the asking price and you believe they can get it, it probably makes you assume more value in your own asset.

---

1.  Williams and Kirk are 2 totally different players lol.   Williams is a deal I would call a team friendly deal.  1 is a guy that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams and the other is a good slot WR.  Can Kirk improve on the outside? Hopefully, but his deal is based on what they are hoping he can do not on what he has done.

---

Agreed completely Williams and Kirk are two entirely different types of player.  Yet their production is eeerily similar, eith Kirk actually having more catches in one fewer year than Williams, with the base salary some $2 million a year less than Williams deal.  BYC Jags has a point about that Williams deal.  If the production is very similar, why castigate the Jaguars for signing a lesser deal than Williams got with the Chargers?

You base WR production on catches?  Give me yards and TDs.  One done most of his work out of the slot and the other is a 6'4" 220lb WR that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams, he was a top 10 pick for a reason.  2 of his last 3 years he has had over 1000 yards and it would be 3 straight if he didn't miss 5 games a couple of years ago.  Kirk has never had a 1000 yards in a season.  With that said I think Trev is one of those QBs that can make a WR better and I think he gets his first 1000 yrd season.  I thought we overpaid a bit for Kirk but I've already said his contract looks much better after he helped set the market.  Do you want me to say I loved his contract and thought we got a steal?  Lol

---

1.  Williams and Kirk are 2 totally different players lol.   Williams is a deal I would call a team friendly deal.  1 is a guy that could be a number 1 on a lot of teams and the other is a good slot WR.  Can Kirk improve on the outside? Hopefully, but his deal is based on what they are hoping he can do not on what he has done.

You're the same guy that spent two pages defending the Kirk deal based on his production and our lack of production at his position, plus quoting slot receiver stats to justify it RIGHT??

I'll post your words here if that's what you really want. 
I doubt you do, since you're now talking out of both sides of your mouth. 

The whole slot vs outside thing is kind of a joke at this point - and anyone who has broken down successful offenses in the past ten years has seen multiple teams win with slot production over X and Z. Of course the ideal is having a #1 guy at X, but in the same way 32 teams don't have a franchise QB, many have to find a way without an elite X until it comes around for them.

Why wouldn't I want you to post my words?  I don't give 2 [BLEEP] what you post lol.  I said i think Kirk is one of the better slot WRs but I never said i liked paying him almost 20 mil per season to a slot WR.  Just like I wouldn't want to pay a good nickel corner like one of the highest paid corners in the league.

---

Kupp is a slot receiver.

---

Kupp is a slot receiver.

Yes, he's elite and playing like one of the All time greats.  He's an exception,

---

Why?

Admittedly I was not en economics or finance major, so you may need to dumb it down for me, but if an average WR gets paid an excessive amount in what is, by its very nature a restricted market, why wouldn't the upper end of the market adjust upward to put salaries in line?

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

They shouldn't, but somehow every time someone signs a ridiculously bloated contract, national media starts talking about how that's the starting point for the next guy.  Why is the next team always expected to be just as stupid as the previous one?  Or perhaps this is the first season I can remember when teams said, "We aren't that stupid, so we're trading you instead."

I didn't really buy the whole 'we broke the WR market' narrative myself, but it was funny hearing about it.  And if the Kirk contract helped some of our rivals move on from some top talent, icing on the cake for me  

---

1. The Mike Williams deal happened before the Kirk deal 

2. The Kirk deal is structured WAYY differently then all of those it supposedly inflated (lower % of guaranteed $$ and a two year team out clause most notably. 

3. Single Outliers don't shift market behavior meaningfully. Trends do. 

 4. Individual teams who want their guy will pay what they can to get him - but if they are letting an agent bully the price up on a Tyreek Hill "because of" Christian Kirk - they are simply bad negotiators and their behavior is contributing to a market shift as much as - or more than the Kirk deal.

They shouldn't, but somehow every time someone signs a ridiculously bloated contract, national media starts talking about how that's the starting point for the next guy.  Why is the next team always expected to be just as stupid as the previous one?  Or perhaps this is the first season I can remember when teams said, "We aren't that stupid, so we're trading you instead."

I didn't really buy the whole 'we broke the WR market' narrative myself, but it was funny hearing about it.  And if the Kirk contract helped some of our rivals move on from some top talent, icing on the cake for me  

Agreed with that last sentence.  I'm glad we gave him the contract we did just being it weakened arguably the 2 best teams in the AFC when Brown and Hill got traded.   On the flip side the Raiders and Dolphins got much better

---