So Waddle just got his new deal...and we're all anxiously awaiting Tua's new deal...Got me to thinking if there was a better way all around to manage some of these contracts. Now, what I'm thinking isn't revolutionary, but it's rare in todays NFL. The idea rattling around in my head has some merit (I think so), but I want to know what you guys think.

Let me preface this by saying I wouldn't do this with every player looking for an extension. But if you're talking about a young player, someone you've identified as a core player for your team, why not keep it simple and just do a short term fully guaranteed contract? As an example, the team says Tua is our QB, and he is going to be our QB. If that's true, why not cut through the BS and sit down with him and say here's a 3 year contract, $135M, fully guaranteed. For the player, he wins huge with this approach because a) the guaranteed money is what really matters to them, b) the short term means they get another bite at the apple in their prime so if they play well, they'll be worth more. For the team, you get cost certainty and some cost containment. Tua's biggest fans cringe when the number talked about for him gets above $50M a year. At this term and number, you're at $45M. And that's not out of line at all for the guaranteed money in the deals for top 10 QB's. Both sides have an earlier out if they want. Or, an easier path to the next deal if they continue to love each other. Just seems like a simpler approach to me for specific players...like Holland, or a guy with some promise like Phillips, but with some concern coming off injury. If fully healthy, these are guys we don't want to lose. Just a thought...curious to hear what you guys think...