If the Lions had simply cut those players, like most teams do, you wouldn't have given two thoughts about it. But because they worked out a mutually beneficial arrangement, you somehow find it offensive.
It's not hardball, it's simply a negotiation. If Cominsky, Vatai and Okwara didn't have any problem with it, why should you? If they had a problem with it, they surely would have declined and entered the free market as many others have.
He got a $48 million guarantee. That's the number to focus on. If he'd gotten a 5 year 150 million deal with 48 million guaranteed, it would sound a lot better, but wouldn't be.
Other teams just cut players, like Green Bay did with Aaron Jones. It happens all the time. Players want to stay and play in Detroit. And the Lions may not spend their cap how you want them to, but they will spend it.
Sure, plus, as things stand, they are likely to get a 3/4 for the loss of Jackson. If they had signed a pricey cornerback instead of the trade, that would have offset that.
Pretty much, I like the "Holmes" strategy. I'd hoard draft picks and keep pumping young blood into the system. No problem splurging on a free agent who really fits, but give up premium draft capital and pay a premium salary for one player, no.