Lamar Jackson’s contract negotiations played out in the media, and both sides aren’t equal

Photo by G Fiume/Getty Images

There is a narrative being pushed and we don’t have to fall for it.

The Lamar Jackson situation remains the most nonsensical drama in the NFL with the 2023 NFL Draft approaching. Nobody has attempted to sign the former MVP, even quarterback-needy teams in desperate demand of a positional upgrade who are outside the top-five in the draft where they could find a passer.

With each passing day it lends credence to the idea that there’s collusion among NFL front offices. No other player of Jackson’s caliber would exist on the open market for this long, without a plan behind the scenes — even when it would require two first round picks to sign him. After all, this is a league where far more has been given up for less in recent years.

The biggest knock against making a play for Jackson is perception, and that’s what makes this situation dicey. There has been a pervasive, endless subtext of “Lamar is greedy” since this process began, and that’s dominated the narrative. It was established early on that Jackson wanted “Deshaun Watson money,” specifically referring to a fully guaranteed contract, which the Ravens refused to do.

On Monday the latest update on Jackson, coming from Ian Rapoport of the NFL Network poured more gasoline on the “greedy” narrative.

Rapoport has been the key insider at the front of sharing Jackson contract offers. Adam Schefter has been instrumental in this too. Meanwhile Lamar Jackson has been resolute that these reports on contract offers are a lie, but he’s already lost the narrative battle — because he’s involved in the negotiations, but the NFL insiders aren’t. They’re outside observers, right? Well, not really.

The nature of “insider” reporting is an ethical mess

How we consume news has changed — that goes without saying. The speed of the information era has caused all of us to crave immediacy, which has led to some really questionable practices.

In the past there were really three kinds of stories:

Breaking news, which was a quick hit on something happening right now — written within a few hours.
Reported pieces, which could normally be turned around in a few days to a week. These typically dealt with current events.
Investigative stories, which took extensive research and months of work. Normally these involved looking back on past stories and uncovering previously unreported details.

In these cases there were some basic tenets of journalism that took place when you were breaking news. The reporter would hear about something from a well-vetted source, seek more sources to clarify, and ask for comment from the parties involved. When that process was complete they would write.

The old breaking news cycle in sports in gone

This has given rise to the “insider.” A manufactured term designed to differentiate it from journalism, and in doing so free those who break news on social media from any journalistic ethics.

The insider sausage is often made in some really gross ways. They’re based on unspoken quid pro quo arrangements, typically involving agents and teams. The insider is given a reliable stream of information to extend their reach and the perception of their reliability, and in exchange they will report exactly what their sources want. This allows them to churn out tweets quicker than anyone, while the source gets the first stab at controlling the message.

This isn’t a hidden secret. For years Schefter has been criticized for how he handles news. In 2021 emails revealed that Schefter sent the full text of a story he was going to publish about the Washington Commanders to then-GM Bruce Allen, even referring to him as “Mr. Editor,” an honorific which made it clear the team would get to change anything in the story before it went live.

To make the water even more murky, Schefter is personally represented by CAA, an agency which also has dozens of athletes on its roster. Schefter shares agencies with the athletes he is paid to write about — but this is all hand waved off, because he’s an “insider,” not a journalist.

So, in the case of Lamar Jackson who doesn’t have an agent, who do you think gets to control the message: A team who has cultivated a relationship with an insider and offers the promise of more stories in the future, or a single player?

This isn’t unique to Schefter, either. The primary source of the news about Jackson’s contract comes directly from an insider employed by the NFL itself. Rapoport collects paychecks from the league, a league with owners who don’t want guaranteed contracts to become the norm. If nobody agrees to sign Jackson to a fully guaranteed deal, then he’ll have the accept the Ravens’ best offer.

We know from recent revelations shared by former NFL Network writer Jim Trotter that there is an expectation that whoever works for the league toes the line, even if they’re presented as third-party observers.

Where does this leave us with Lamar Jackson?

We’re still back to where we were originally. Think of this as an extended “he said/they said.” Anything coming from the NFL newsroom, or an NFL “insider” should be treated like a press release from the Ravens themselves. Meanwhile, Jackson has been largely silent on where negotiations are — instead opting to refute reports he says are false, without really outlining exactly what he’s been offered.

That’s his prerogative, and it’s fine! This is a business negotiation between Lamar Jackson and the Ravens, so it’s pretty ridiculous we’re getting any reports about what’s being offered in the first place. Nobody knew what Jalen Hurts would make until his negotiations were over. The same can be said for Russell Wilson or Deshaun Watson, both of whom signed massive extensions without the details of negotiations being made public. Only one party appears to be negotiating privately in good faith, and it’s Lamar Jackson.

If you truly care about accuracy involving the Lamar Jackson situation, know that there’s none to be had. Every bit on information on both sides should be taken with a huge grain of salt, and in this case that means NFL insiders are on a firm side too. They’re in bed with the Ravens and are a tool to control the message. The only thing you can do is not contribute to the noise and let them successfully brand Jackson as “greedy” over offers we don’t even know are true.