Lamar Jackson is the most electrifying quarterback in the NFL. He can throw bombs on a rope, swiftly elude a pass rush and outrun any defense.
But over the last month, he’s been unable to escape Baltimore as the Ravens and the NFL have clipped Lamar’s wings with their economically restrictive policies.
During the last two years, the Ravens and Lamar Jackson have been trying to negotiate a contract that would keep Jackson in Charm City for at least the next five seasons.
Lamar wants guaranteed money and a contract similar to what Deshaun Watson received in Cleveland.
The Ravens, and to be clear the rest of the NFL, don’t want Lamar’s contract to come anywhere near Watson’s. A $230 million guaranteed contract, they believe, would set an expensive precedent. So instead of negotiating with him in good faith, or letting him emancipate himself from his team, the NFL has told the league’s most dynamic quarterback to stay in place.
The Ravens placed a non-exclusive franchise tag on him, giving teams an opportunity to negotiate with him, but giving the Ravens a chance to match any contract he receives. If they don’t, Baltimore would receive two first-round picks as compensation.
To date, there have been no takers.
This is a clear-cut case of collusion, a tool leagues have used in the past to shackle their brightest stars.
But it’s also a game that owners can’t win for as we have witnessed in the past in other sports, labor will find a way to win and in the end, Lamar will make them pay.
Just like Tim Raines did.
Tim Raines and the Freedom of Mobility
In 1987, Raines, a 27-year-old superstar, should have been a top priority for many teams when he hit free agency.
Raines led the league in hitting at .334, was first in on-base percentage, and swiped 70 bases. Between 1982-87 in Montreal, he averaged .305 and 76 base burglaries a year. Simply put, he should have been able to command whatever price he wanted.
Raines, who made $1.5 million in 1986, felt like he deserved more but the Expos only offered him $4.8 million for three years, a mere 6.7% raise for one of the most dynamic players in the game.
With big-time spenders like George Steinbrenner (Yankees), Gene Autry (Angels), and Ted Turner (Braves) possessing the ability to lure Raines away, why would the Expos lowball him?
Because the Expos, like the Ravens, knew other teams would not step up to the plate.
In the 1980s, owners tired of paying what they thought were astronomical rates for big-time stars and decided to put an end to it. So instead of creating bidding wars, they colluded to keep salaries down.
When a player hit free agency, other teams would not offer more money than a player’s previous team. As a result, teams like the Expos could offer their stars like Raines, and his best friend and fellow All-Star Andre Dawson, less than they deserved. That same off-season, Montreal offered Dawson two years at $2 million, which was actually a $100,000 pay cut. When he declined, the best he could muster was $500,000 from the Cubs, an offer he received because he went to their GM, Dallas Green, with a blank contract and told him to fill it in.
That year Dawson led the Majors with 137 RBIs and the NL with 49 home runs en route to winning the MVP.
All while earning way less than his proven worth.
Back then, players understood the economics of the situation, especially Black players. Even though all players were impacted by collusion, Black players were clear to put this injustice in terms of race and freedom. Don Baylor put the situation best.
“We’re back on the plantation again.”
While some balk at likening players’ salaries to slavery, in the case of collusion, whether it be in 1987 in MLB, or the present day with Lamar Jackson, the plantation mentality exists. Freedom is all about mobility, and the whole purpose of the franchise tag is to prevent a team’s best workers from moving.
For the longest time, professional teams did their best to fight free agency.
They knew that in a real open market, player salaries would rise. But just as important, players would have more control of their careers. In short, mobility gave them power. Even after professional leagues were forced to allow some sort of free agency, they still tried to fight true player movement by forcing restrictive clauses.
In the NFL between 1977 and 1987, only one player left their team via free agency. In fact, the great running back Walter Payton hit the market twice during that time, and never received an offer from another team. Back then a team could retain a player whose contract had ended by offering a minimum of a 10% raise or they could simply match any offer another team gave him. Without competition or the threat of true mobility, the Bears did not have to pay the greatest running back his fair market value.
Tired of this oppressive situation, the players went on strike in 1987.
But even when the NFL finally granted free agency, they tried their best to restrict mobility, especially that of star quarterbacks.
In 1993, the NFL created the franchise tag, a move that allowed teams to keep a potential free agent by giving him a one-year contract that is the average pay of the top 5 players at his position. As the salaries have skyrocketed, the amount of money a franchised player makes is staggering. Lamar is scheduled to make $32 million.
But money isn’t mobility.
It’s the price the NFL has had to pay when they restrict freedom because in a real open market, Lamar Jackson would be able to earn more money and play where he wants. As we know now, Lamar no longer wants to be a Raven for he revealed last week that he demanded a trade back on March 2nd.
The Bond Shared by Tim and Lamar
Just like Raines wanted to leave Montreal in 1987, Jackson appears to be in the same boat for the same reason- owner collusion.
Lamar being a non-exclusive franchised player means that his off-the-field mobility is limited for he’s dependent upon a team making an offer and the Ravens not matching it. That makes it a prohibitive tactic.
Regardless of the offer, there’s no denying that teams have the opportunity to acquire a once-in-a-generation player like Lamar. Just like it made no sense for teams not to offer prime Tim Raines an adequate contract, it makes no sense for a team to stick with Desmond Ridder, Sam Howell, or Mac Jones when there’s a 26-year-old former MVP available, one of only two unanimous MVPs in league history (Tom Brady is the other).
But while everyone in 1987 was quick to point to the fact that MLB colluded against Raines and other free agents, a case they won in 1988, too many have been reluctant to say the same about the NFL.
The excuses as to why Lamar hasn’t been able to secure a long-term deal range from running leads to his injuries (he was injured while in the pocket) to his lack of an agent (Laremy Tunsil signed a massive contract with the Texans while representing himself). Yet in a league that purposely puts restrictive clauses in their CBA and where someone like the late great Walter Payton could not even receive a free agent contract, the blame should not be on Lamar.
The truth is the NFL is colluding against Lamar Jackson. It’s in the owner’s nature.
Teams who should be desperate to sign Lamar are refusing to offer him a contract. They believe that if they have to pay him his fair market value, then they’ll have to pay Joe Burrow, Jalen Hurts, Justin Herbert and Trevor Lawrence even more (guaranteed) money.
And just like MLB owners who grew tired of giving players like Dave Winfield and Rickey Henderson huge contracts and took it out on guys like Raines and Dawson, the NFL is trying to make an example out of Lamar.
The Raines case is a cautionary tale for all involved.
In 1987, when no team offered Raines a contract he was embarrassed. As one writer put it, “he had to drop his tail between his legs and go back to Montreal.”
Yet he made everyone pay for the shame he felt.
After being forced to sit out until May 1 (he could not re-sign with the Expos until then) he hit .333, stole 50 bases, and scored a run in 114 of 128 games. And as he tore up the NL, the Players Association sued MLB for collusion and won. Fearing Raines would leave as a free agent, the Expos had to pay him his worth and doubled his salary in 1988.
The NFLPA and Lamar need to follow the MLBPA’s playbook. Take the NFL to arbitration for collusion, and when they win that clear-cut case, Lamar will make the league pay.
