2024 Roster Status/Tracker

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think he gets involved. Gotta be tough to have these injuries that are so difficult to get over.

When he is playing again, watch him carefully, often his only focus seems to be his coverage. When a play goes another way, he tends to stand and watch.

 

[gopkrs]

When he is playing again, watch him carefully, often his only focus seems to be his coverage. When a play goes another way, he tends to stand and watch.

imo he stands and watches when his getting involved won't really help the tackle. And that's just smart. He isn't as physical as I'd like; but he makes some good tackles.

 

[Magooch]

I'll take C.

A player that plays at the level he is being paid for and plays at that level consistently.

There are many players in the NFL that fit into that category, JA is not one of them IMO.

I don't even know who said it yesterday, maybe Tom Brady? He was talking about when John Elway (maybe Peyton Manning?) signed a big contract and someone told Elway "You earned it man". Elway responded with "No, I am now going to go out there and earn what they are paying me every time I play."

Football and for the most part all major sports has turned into this; "We are going to pay you based on your past performance and this pay assumes that you will continue to play at that level or even better." I wouldn't have a problem with that, if a lot of the money wasn't guaranteed. I understand guaranteeing against injury in a sport like football, but come on, how many career ending injuries do we see in a season? How many football careers that end, due to injury, should give the player $10-231 Million GUARANTEED?

I don't totally disagree but at the same time you have to play the hand you're dealt. It's fine to say "I don't think we should be paying guys these huge guaranteed contracts" and I can somewhat agree with that, but it's a moot point. If you don't pay that guy (Jaire or whoever it is) the contract they're asking for, 99% of the time someone else will. Until you can get all 31 owners on board with not handing out big guaranteed contracts that's pretty much how it's got to be: either you give out that contract, or you lose the player and watch someone else give out that contract to them.

The money has gotten asinine and guys like Jaire, that take a big paycheck and then are only available, when they want to be available, is ruining the game (for me).

Yeah, but the trouble for me is that I think this ("want" to be available) implies that he's milking his injuries or just picking and choosing when he feels like playing or not. As far as I know, I can't see any evidence to suggest that this is the case. Maybe that's not what you meant to imply, but if so I feel like that's a pretty serious accusation to make without anything to corroborate it.

I would also contend that in the case of a guaranteed contract (or partial - Ja "only" got 30m of his 84m extension guaranteed), the team also has a vested interest in protecting their investment. The player with the guaranteed contract collects their check whether they are healthy and able to play or not. But if they are questionable/doubtful/etc and the team allows (asks? encourages?) them to play and they exacerbate their injury or something, then the team is going to be without a key player for longer (and paying them all the same) while the player cashes their checks regardless.

It seems to me like it's difficult to complain about big guaranteed contracts while also suggesting that the player themselves is the driving factor in if they play or not: IMO, if it's a guaranteed contract, the team has more incentive to be a bit more conservative with the player. If it's a non-guaranteed contract, the player has more incentive to get themselves back out there (even if not 100%).

We should also consider that Jaire wasn't particularly injury-prone prior to his extension:
In 2018 he had 11 starts in 13 games played.
2019 - 16/16
2020 - 15/15
In 2021 he had a big shoulder injury that held him out for the year for the most part. Played and started just 4 games. Lest we forget however, he was listed as questionable heading into the 49ers game in the playoffs and he still suited up to play it.
Signed extension in May of 22.
Next season, again went and played 16/16.
It wasn't until recently that he's seemed to have picked up the injury bug. If he was looking to catch a big payday and then just "pick and choose" when to play, why would he play in every game the season immediately following his big extension? He already got his payday.

Again it seems similar to Bakh to me: a guy who was largely healthy and elite, got rewarded with a big contract, and then got hit by repeat injuries and just couldn't seem to stay healthy. But I haven't seen many accusing Bakhtiari of just wanting to collect a paycheck and only playing when he felt like it.

 

[OldSchool101]

The money has gotten asinine and guys like Jaire, that take a big paycheck and then are only available, when they want to be available, is ruining the game (for me).

I agree. Im not trying to demonize guys that make $$, but ALL contracts should built in safeguards that if you miss substantial time? The player should participate a healthy amount in the loss of team value.

Now if you had several seasons of near perfect attendance and also come back post injury and do that again? You should get rewarded by recouping a portion of the lost salary. Point being, incentivize playing and vice versa

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree. Im not trying to demonize guys that make $$, but ALL contracts should built in safeguards that if you miss substantial time? The player should participate a healthy amount in the loss of team value.

Now if you had several seasons of near perfect attendance and also come back post injury and do that again? You should get rewarded by recouping a portion of the lost salary. Point being, incentivize playing and vice versa

Really, the only thing that all the NFL money effects directly, are owners bottom lines. Like I have said in the past, the NFL basically prints their own money and then decides how the pie should be split up.

Now the indirect effect of it is large for me the fan. First, obviously, it doesn't sit well with me when I compare an NFL players salary with a teachers salary. Second, economically it does impact me. Sure, I can stop going to games, not watch them on TV and basically avoid the NFL all together. However, consumer goods and the prices are effected directly by the NFL. Any product that advertises through the NFL, costs more. So one might say "Well then don't buy Budweiser Beer". Well, that is smart advice no matter what, but if I buy a 6 pack of "No Commercialized Brewery" beer, I can guarantee you, they raise the prices of their beer, every time Budweiser does.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't totally disagree but at the same time you have to play the hand you're dealt. It's fine to say "I don't think we should be paying guys these huge guaranteed contracts" and I can somewhat agree with that, but it's a moot point. If you don't pay that guy (Jaire or whoever it is) the contract they're asking for, 99% of the time someone else will. Until you can get all 31 owners on board with not handing out big guaranteed contracts that's pretty much how it's got to be: either you give out that contract, or you lose the player and watch someone else give out that contract to them.

Yeah, but the trouble for me is that I think this ("want" to be available) implies that he's milking his injuries or just picking and choosing when he feels like playing or not. As far as I know, I can't see any evidence to suggest that this is the case. Maybe that's not what you meant to imply, but if so I feel like that's a pretty serious accusation to make without anything to corroborate it.

I would also contend that in the case of a guaranteed contract (or partial - Ja "only" got 30m of his 84m extension guaranteed), the team also has a vested interest in protecting their investment. The player with the guaranteed contract collects their check whether they are healthy and able to play or not. But if they are questionable/doubtful/etc and the team allows (asks? encourages?) them to play and they exacerbate their injury or something, then the team is going to be without a key player for longer (and paying them all the same) while the player cashes their checks regardless.

It seems to me like it's difficult to complain about big guaranteed contracts while also suggesting that the player themselves is the driving factor in if they play or not: IMO, if it's a guaranteed contract, the team has more incentive to be a bit more conservative with the player. If it's a non-guaranteed contract, the player has more incentive to get themselves back out there (even if not 100%).

We should also consider that Jaire wasn't particularly injury-prone prior to his extension:
In 2018 he had 11 starts in 13 games played.
2019 - 16/16
2020 - 15/15
In 2021 he had a big shoulder injury that held him out for the year for the most part. Played and started just 4 games. Lest we forget however, he was listed as questionable heading into the 49ers game in the playoffs and he still suited up to play it.
Signed extension in May of 22.
Next season, again went and played 16/16.
It wasn't until recently that he's seemed to have picked up the injury bug. If he was looking to catch a big payday and then just "pick and choose" when to play, why would he play in every game the season immediately following his big extension? He already got his payday.

Again it seems similar to Bakh to me: a guy who was largely healthy and elite, got rewarded with a big contract, and then got hit by repeat injuries and just couldn't seem to stay healthy. But I haven't seen many accusing Bakhtiari of just wanting to collect a paycheck and only playing when he felt like it.

Oh I agree with your assessment of "This is how the NFL is run and if you don't pay players like Jaire, you will eventually suck." What I am saying, as a fan, I absolutely hate the money in the NFL and worse, the guaranteed money. I think the guaranteed money dilutes the final product for fans. If players were paid based on each games performance, I think you would see a much higher level of play.

As far as Jaire goes, I am not directly implying that he is faking injuries or refusing to play with bumps and bruises that others might suit up and play with. However, what I am saying, is when he is playing, all it takes is watching him away from the ball, to tell you just how "hard" he plays the game. I'd take 4 CB's of lesser talent, but equal total pay over Jaire.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

imo he stands and watches when his getting involved won't really help the tackle. And that's just smart. He isn't as physical as I'd like; but he makes some good tackles.

Honestly, I wish I had film to show you. However I don't, but I can say that I have seen him look like a matador when a tackle is broken and he was just standing there watching, not in a good football position to help out.

 

[OldSchool101]

Really, the only thing that all the NFL money effects directly, are owners bottom lines. Like I have said in the past, the NFL basically prints their own money and then decides how the pie should be split up.

Now the indirect effect of it is large for me the fan. First, obviously, it doesn't sit well with me when I compare an NFL players salary with a teachers salary. Second, economically it does impact me. Sure, I can stop going to games, not watch them on TV and basically avoid the NFL all together. However, consumer goods and the prices are effected directly by the NFL. Any product that advertises through the NFL, costs more. So one might say "Well then don't buy Budweiser Beer". Well, that is smart advice no matter what, but if I buy a 6 pack of "No Commercialized Brewery" beer, I can guarantee you, they raise the prices of their beer, every time Budweiser does.

I’m a weird one. I support Capitalism (there’s a recent push to demonize what got us here) but I also don’t like the disproportionate earnings that punish the little guy. I sincerely believe there is a happy medium where everyone can win. There’s enough wealth in the NFL to keep ticket prices affordable for an ordinary household. Put the smaller injury Salary savings into an escrow that both funds home games at a substantially reduced ticket price.

There also needs to be a NFL committee that regulates the availability of games for regular consumers. It’s ridiculous that everything needs to be exploited for $$ so heavily. It doesn’t need to be this way, there can be some games that are available for free like it used to be (MNF) etc.

Nobody expects to see every game for free. But a certain % of games should be made totally free of charge or at least you can choose to pay $3.99 like when you rent a Movie. It’s getting way to convoluted to just be a fan and watch a game. Too many hands in the Cookie jar