$25 million man?

[Tony Oday]

ESPN reporting deal is close on AR...wow thats a lot of cap.

[woodbuck27]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9107196/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-getting-closer-massive-long-term-extension-according-sources

The rumor is the deal is close and Aaron Rodgers will become the highest paid player in NFL history. It's being reported that his contract extension will come in at 4 years and $100,000,000$ (that's alot of zeros).

If this is true? What is the real price to the Green Bay Packers and Packer fans? If this is true will we sensably shout BRAVO Ted Thompson? If this is true can we associate it with anything approaching the definition of intelligence?

OK this is simply a stupid rumor? Ted Thompson cannot be so stupid to pay out that much percentage of the Packers CAP for one man.

I dont believe this rumor is true. It cannot be true on any level of logic.

It's simply a rumor, so ignore it.

[Fritz]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9107196/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-getting-closer-massive-long-term-extension-according-sources

The rumor is the deal is close and Aaron Rodgers will become the highest paid player in NFL history. It's being reported that his contract extension will come in at 4 years and $100,000,000$ (that's alot of zeros).

If this is true? What is the real price to the Green Bay Packers and Packer fans? If this is true will we sensably shout BRAVO Ted Thompson? If this is true can we associate it with anything approaching the definition of intelligence?

OK this is simply a stupid rumor? Ted Thompson cannot be so stupid to pay out that much percentage of the Packers CAP for one man.

I dont believe this rumor is true. It cannot be true on any level of logic.

It`s simply a rumor so ignore it.

Let's have a thread where we talk about ignoring it.

[woodbuck27]

Let's have a thread where we talk about ignoring it.

You and I just began that discussion Fritz...right here.

My point is that there is `no ìt`RE: just a rumor. Thus it`s easy to ignore.

Ted Thompson will not sell out to Aaron Rodgers.

Ted Thompson will not sell out to any rumored Aaron Rodgers ego desire.

Aaron Rodgers (and his agent) nor Ted Thompson is so stupid to anchor the Packer salary CAP with such an exorbitant contract for Aaron Rodgers. Such a contract is simply silly.

That rumor is like nails. It would be like me handing you nails and saying to you to use them to nail your own coffin.

Stupid and silly.

[QBME]

Let's have a thread where we talk about ignoring it.

Ignoring a problem won't make it go away, and yet ignorance is bliss.

I feel happily confused.

[red]

this shouldn't shock anyone, we all knew it was coming, and many of us knew it would be around the 25 million a year mark

word on PFT is that clays deal is getting close too

[3irty1]

Sad part is that he's probably worth more than 25M.

Really you've got to ask yourself how much would you have to pay Rodgers before there wouldn't be enough cap leftover to buy the rest of a perennial playoff team? I think its a lot more than 20% of the cap. Really speaks to the importance of the position. Yeah you are putting all of your eggs in one basket but who isn't? Even if Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, or Drew Brees made the vet minimum, their respective teams are still screwed if they went down. How many teams win superbowls with backup QBs? I know its not impossible. Doug Williams did it. Jeff Hostetler did it. Tom Brady was technically a backup entering the year he won his first ring. Still you can't love those odds.

I suspect that the rapidly increasing QB salaries aren't just a bubble but rather the value of a QB finally being realized in the market. For the longest time Brady and Manning were the elites and neither ever got a real sniff of their market value. Now that elite QB's have actually switched teams, things are different.

[woodbuck27]

this shouldn't shock anyone, we all knew it was coming, and many of us knew it would be around the 25 million a year mark

word on PFT is that clays deal is getting close too

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/28/pieces-in-place-for-packers-to-do-matthews-deal-soon-too/

Pieces in place for Packers to do Matthews deal soon too.

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/x35013-e1364482130948.jpg?w=450

Posted by Darin Gantt on March 28, 2013, 10:49 AM EDT

[Guiness]

Rumours heating up
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/jason-la-canfora/21965065/aaron-rodgers-soon-to-become-nfls-highestpaid-quarterback
I'm thinking where there's smoke, there's fire.

[Patler]

I'm not at all surprised, recent contracts for other QBs told us this was coming.

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.

[swede]

I'm not at all surprised, recent contracts for other QBs told us this was coming.

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.

I could never figure out why an organization like the NFLPA allows the stars to dominate. Why wouldn't a majority of the players want a structure that prevented 40% of the money going to 10% of the players? It kind of is a team sport. Even the lamest guy is an elite athlete risking his life and future earnings at any other kind of job.

[hoosier]

Ignoring a problem won't make it go away, and yet ignorance is bliss.

I feel happily confused.

What you don't know can't hurt you.

[Cheesehead Craig]

GMs that pay their players this much really are doubling down on their drafting ability. Getinng players in their rookie contracts to really play well is going to be even more important.

[hoosier]

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.

Is that any different than the rest of our country? Oops, wrong room.

[Joemailman]

There should be a limit on what percentage of a team's cap can go to a single player. It's too bad Flacco got that contract because that raised the ceiling. At least Rodgers getting this contract should set the ceiling, since I don't know who can claim they should be making more than him.

[swede]

I'm not at all surprised, recent contracts for other QBs told us this was coming.

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.


Is that any different than the rest of our country? Oops, wrong room.

No hard cap in real life.

[Patler]

Is that any different than the rest of our country? Oops, wrong room.

In some ways - no, it isn't; but in many ways - yes, it is different, in my opinion.

[Spaulding]

Correct me if I'm wrong (likely possibility) but isn't Rodgers signed for another two years at around 12mil/year? If so, it simply means he's extended with a new average over the next six years to an average of just over 20mil/year which seems pretty reasonable. Especially if they front load a bit this year and then the cap goes up in 2015 with the new TV deal.

[woodbuck27]

I'm not at all surprised, recent contracts for other QBs told us this was coming.

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTbbjpQnZbjRTUzUHgXymIJXW57Q_J8_ 9j7lMWcy_h5H5KzyTR1

Gimme the pie !

[woodbuck27]

Correct me if I'm wrong (likely possibility) but isn't Rodgers signed for another two years at around 12mil/year? If so, it simply means he's extended with a new average over the next six years to an average of just over 20mil/year which seems pretty reasonable. Especially if they front load a bit this year and then the cap goes up in 2015 with the new TV deal.

Yes it has to be something like that.

He will get a massive gurantee but a flat out $25 million$ per season - whatever length extension - is simply outrageous money. I believe that the Green Bay Packers are smarter than that.

It doesn't make sense that Ted Thompson would want to lock this one up now. At the same time come closer to breaking the bank to sign Aaron Rodgers. Aaron Rodgers contract has to be considered as a business decision not a reward.

It cannot be anything like:

There look at that. Aaron Rodgers makes $25 million$ per year as he's the best QB in the NFL....best QB ever in the NFL or anything like that. Yes he deserves a top contract but not 25% more than the highest contract of any other NFL QB. Both sides should to be reasonable/fair in overall regards.

All NFL Team GM eyes's will be on this story. It's certainly an interesting one.

GO PACK GO !

[pbmax]

I could never figure out why an organization like the NFLPA allows the stars to dominate. Why wouldn't a majority of the players want a structure that prevented 40% of the money going to 10% of the players? It kind of is a team sport. Even the lamest guy is an elite athlete risking his life and future earnings at any other kind of job.

In baseball, the stars dominate without a cap and it helps drive the baseline for everyone else (except perhaps new draftees) through arbitration which broadly tries to compare like for like. So a pitcher with a brand new record deal helps anyone who can use it as a point of reference.

In football, the players never got the complete, functional transmission system and had to accept a cap to get what they did. Agents drive new highs and agents get the most leverage with QBs and high draft picks. The NFLPA just gave away the draft pick leverage in the last CBA.

I am sure there are multiple ways to alter the balance (higher minimums?) but its a tough spot. The NFLPA was never as effective as the MLBPA and the baseball owners made football owners look like Eisenhower, MacArthur and Patton.

The NFLPA did twice before propose going to a "let us distribute the pot of money model" scheme but owners, agents AND QBs hated that deal.

[pbmax]

And back on topic, don't read too much into the top line number. What matters is cash, guarantees and the first three years. The deal might say $25 mil per, but not actually achieve that until some unlikely to be seen out years.

I still hope they go the guaranteed route.

[QBME]

GMs that pay their players this much really are doubling down on their drafting ability. Getinng players in their rookie contracts to really play well is going to be even more important.

This

[Joemailman]

Yes it has to be something like that.

He will get a massive gurantee but a flat out $25 million$ per season - whatever length extension - is simply outrageous money. I believe that the Green Bay Packers are smarter than that.

It doesn't make sense that Ted Thompson would want to lock this one up now. At the same time come closer to breaking the bank to sign Aaron Rodgers. Aaron Rodgers contract has to be considered as a business decision not a reward.

It cannot be anything like:

There look at that. Aaron Rodgers makes $25 million$ per year as he's the best QB in the NFL....best QB ever in the NFL or anything like that. Yes he deserves a top contract but not 25% more than the highest contract of any other NFL QB. Both sides should to be reasonable/fair in overall regards.

All NFL Team GM eyes's will be on this story. It's certainly an interesting one.

GO PACK GO !

It makes perfect sense for Ted Thompson to lock up Rodgers now before the going price for elite QB's goes up any more. Joe Flacco getting 20M per year means that Rodgers, the NFL's best QB, will get more. By signing Rodgers to an extension, he gets to set the price instead of letting other teams determine what the price will be. What will Rodgers' value be if Jerry Jones signs Romo for 25 million (Just to use an example).

[MJZiggy]

Ignoring a problem won't make it go away, and yet ignorance is bliss.

I feel happily confused.
That's just the sedatives working their magic.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Teams have the same salary cap. Let the GMs figure out who is worth what. Quite frankly, a healthy Rodgers will make us a contender every year. Just like all elite QBs. He's more than worth it. Do you think the Vikings would give up Jared Allen and Greg Jennings (just throwing their names out there because they make $23M combined this year) to get Aaron Rodgers? Hell yeah, they would. I will say it is a huge advantage to get a few years of elite QB play for dirt cheap. Guys like Luck, Griffin, Kaepernick and Russell Wilson are very valuable.

[Guiness]

I'm not at all surprised, recent contracts for other QBs told us this was coming.

But if the numbers are accurate, I think it is a bad situation for the NFL to have gotten itself into. About 20% going to one player, when there are roughly 60-70 other players also needing to be paid? Matthews will likely get in excess of 10% himself. The disparity between a few and the majority will be huge. Some animosity is bound to arise.

I'm with you on this.

And I think that things might be shifting right now. While top QBs are getting stupid money (yes, it's stupid to pay 2% of your employees 20% of the money) it is making for relative bargains at other positions that just a few years ago were considered premium: tackles and CB. Those positions haven't decreased in value on the field!

If a team can effectively apply Oakland's money ball strategy, they will rule this league. Right now, team lucky enough to have good QBs on post 2010 rookie contracts are at the top of the pile. Sorry St-Louis. There are some guys in the 'surprised they are still FAs' thread that can really help teams...and had relatively cheaply compared to what teams would of had to pay for them a couple of years ago.

Coaches salaries are not included in the salary cap. I think teams will start to have more and more coaches (separate ILB and OLB coaches? Really?) and innovative, adaptable schemes, like the Wildcat and Pistol will become more prevalent.

[Patler]

And back on topic, don't read too much into the top line number. What matters is cash, guarantees and the first three years. The deal might say $25 mil per, but not actually achieve that until some unlikely to be seen out years.

I still hope they go the guaranteed route.

Not likely much difference if it is only a four year contract as they are reporting. Hard to play significant games in a contract that short, and not have it so transparent that it would be laughable.

[Patler]

Teams have the same salary cap. Let the GMs figure out who is worth what. Quite frankly, a healthy Rodgers will make us a contender every year. Just like all elite QBs. He's more than worth it. Do you think the Vikings would give up Jared Allen and Greg Jennings (just throwing their names out there because they make $23M combined this year) to get Aaron Rodgers? Hell yeah, they would. I will say it is a huge advantage to get a few years of elite QB play for dirt cheap. Guys like Luck, Griffin, Kaepernick and Russell Wilson are very valuable.

"Worth it" can have so many different implications, that I am not sure if I agree or disagree with you. From the business side, to generate fan excitement and all the associated income that comes with it, an identifiable star, especially a QB, is very important. From the football side and the goal of winning Super Bowls, I don't believe investing that much of all available resources in one or two players (if Matthews gets what we expect) is a good idea.

If the Packers really do invest 1/3 of their salary cap in just two players, they will be in a new era with respect to the rest of the roster. There will be a lot of useful players who will leave for salary cap reasons. Hopefully, they can keep the pipeline full with players on their first contracts. I wouldn't be as concerned, but the recent departures of McKenzie and Dorsey, and to a lesser extent Schneider, has totally revamped that area of their operation. Will they be as good as they were in identifying available talent? Better? Worse? Time will tell us.

[Patler]

I'm with you on this.

And I think that things might be shifting right now. While top QBs are getting stupid money (yes, it's stupid to pay 2% of your employees 20% of the money) it is making for relative bargains at other positions that just a few years ago were considered premium: tackles and CB. Those positions haven't decreased in value on the field!

If a team can effectively apply Oakland's money ball strategy, they will rule this league. Right now, team lucky enough to have good QBs on post 2010 rookie contracts are at the top of the pile. Sorry St-Louis. There are some guys in the 'surprised they are still FAs' thread that can really help teams...and had relatively cheaply compared to what teams would of had to pay for them a couple of years ago.

Coaches salaries are not included in the salary cap. I think teams will start to have more and more coaches (separate ILB and OLB coaches? Really?) and innovative, adaptable schemes, like the Wildcat and Pistol will become more prevalent.

Agreed. I think you can include WRs in the list of positions for which salaries seem to be under re-evaluation, although for WRs I think it is overdue.

Until recently, many of the highest paid players had salary cap impacts of around 15%, and their teams could work in several other players who were paid about half as much as the most expensive players. With one guy getting 20% of the cap, or two getting 1/3 of it, the others will have to be pretty cheap.

There is a bit of a squeeze going on from both ends, which may last a couple years yet, until new broadcast contracts kick in and the salary cap goes up. The cap has been flat for a couple years, but minimum salaries for all players have gone up. So even the cheapest players are getting a larger portion of the cap. Now, with a huge increase in the portion of the cap given to the Packers highest paid players, there is pressure on everyone below the top to push it toward the bottom, which itself is rising.

I am anxious to see the terms for Rodgers and Matthews if and when they happen. We might see some of the cap impact pushed out into the later years when cap limits are expected to rise.

[Fritz]

In baseball, the stars dominate without a cap and it helps drive the baseline for everyone else (except perhaps new draftees) through arbitration which broadly tries to compare like for like. So a pitcher with a brand new record deal helps anyone who can use it as a point of reference.

In football, the players never got the complete, functional transmission system and had to accept a cap to get what they did. Agents drive new highs and agents get the most leverage with QBs and high draft picks. The NFLPA just gave away the draft pick leverage in the last CBA.

I am sure there are multiple ways to alter the balance (higher minimums?) but its a tough spot. The NFLPA was never as effective as the MLBPA and the baseball owners made football owners look like Eisenhower, MacArthur and Patton.

The NFLPA did twice before propose going to a "let us distribute the pot of money model" scheme but owners, agents AND QBs hated that deal.

If Rodgers and Matthews end up eating up 30% of the cap, two things become clear:

1. BJ Raji is as good as gone. Notice that he's no longer being mentioned when it comes to talk of re-signing players.

2. Getting CHEAP young talent will be crucial to the Packers' success. To that end, I've been doing some research, and I think the kid on the right could fill that role for the Pack at the safety spot. He's a big hitter.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1i2PFpIUUynWqoApLuhS5oAdd9fTwe ktjI2GFoyWdqB70gYx_

[pbmax]

Not likely much difference if it is only a four year contract as they are reporting. Hard to play significant games in a contract that short, and not have it so transparent that it would be laughable.

I had not read its a four year deal. If so, that leaves little room for monkey shines.

So I will hope its all guaranteed money.

[pbmax]

Agreed. I think you can include WRs in the list of positions for which salaries seem to be under re-evaluation, although for WRs I think it is overdue.

Until recently, many of the highest paid players had salary cap impacts of around 15%, and their teams could work in several other players who were paid about half as much as the most expensive players. With one guy getting 20% of the cap, or two getting 1/3 of it, the others will have to be pretty cheap.

There is a bit of a squeeze going on from both ends, which may last a couple years yet, until new broadcast contracts kick in and the salary cap goes up. The cap has been flat for a couple years, but minimum salaries for all players have gone up. So even the cheapest players are getting a larger portion of the cap. Now, with a huge increase in the portion of the cap given to the Packers highest paid players, there is pressure on everyone below the top to push it toward the bottom, which itself is rising.

I am anxious to see the terms for Rodgers and Matthews if and when they happen. We might see some of the cap impact pushed out into the later years when cap limits are expected to rise.

There was a recent writeup by Silverstein that suggested Matthews contract might already be done in basic terms and they were simply waiting to be sure Rodgers deal was going to fit with it.

[Patler]

There was a recent writeup by Silverstein that suggested Matthews contract might already be done in basic terms and they were simply waiting to be sure Rodgers deal was going to fit with it.

That would maybe give some credence to the $15M rumors that get tossed around for Matthews.
If true, it gives me pause to think of them having $40M tied up in two players when the salary cap is about $130M. Hopefully there will be substantial increases soon, or it will be difficult to retain very many others. Raji, Finley, Shields in the next year, etc,

[woodbuck27]

It makes perfect sense for Ted Thompson to lock up Rodgers now before the going price for elite QB's goes up any more. Joe Flacco getting 20M per year means that Rodgers, the NFL's best QB, will get more. By signing Rodgers to an extension, he gets to set the price instead of letting other teams determine what the price will be. What will Rodgers' value be if Jerry Jones signs Romo for 25 million (Just to use an example).

Check.

[woodbuck27]

"Worth it" can have so many different implications, that I am not sure if I agree or disagree with you. From the business side, to generate fan excitement and all the associated income that comes with it, an identifiable star, especially a QB, is very important. From the football side and the goal of winning Super Bowls, I don't believe investing that much of all available resources in one or two players (if Matthews gets what we expect) is a good idea.

If the Packers really do invest 1/3 of their salary cap in just two players, they will be in a new era with respect to the rest of the roster. There will be a lot of useful players who will leave for salary cap reasons. Hopefully, they can keep the pipeline full with players on their first contracts. I wouldn't be as concerned, but the recent departures of McKenzie and Dorsey, and to a lesser extent Schneider, has totally revamped that area of their operation. Will they be as good as they were in identifying available talent? Better? Worse? Time will tell us.

Your getting this right Patler.

I want to place this LINK here because it looks at the CAP and a teams loyalty to veteren players of star (former star) quality, given the current tight salary cap restrictions.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9092135/nfl-mailbag-tight-salary-cap-squeezes-loyalty

Loyalty gets sqeezed by tight cap

Teams not willing to spend extra to retain their veteran leaders

Originally Published: March 24, 2013

By John Clayton | ESPN.com

The argument over Aaron Rodgers (Clay Matthews III) and their star status to the Green Bay Packers. Their by all accounts, proposed combined approximate $40 million$ cost to the current $123.9 million$ Salary Cap. Should be confined to a matter of simple math and common sense.

That, in terms of managing the Packer roster fairly.

In this post I'm not even going to chip in with anything BJ Raji. I'm seeing his status and future with the team differently as things currently stand. I have to see more off season developments before I can factor BJ Raji into this picture.

It gets simple in terms related to immediate and impending highly predictable impact :

Two players equals 3.8% of the roster.

$40 million$ equals *32.3% of the CAP.

Let's remove $7 million$ for the rookie class (8 players on our roster). **5.65% of the CAP.

* + ** = 37.95 % of the CAP for 10 roster spots.

43 roster spots (if money was devided evenly) get $1,788,372$ each.

Two players average $20 million$ each Vs 43 players averaging $1.78 million$ each.

Is that Green Bay Packer locker room going to be a very happy place?

After another loss to a non pretender:

"Gee Aaron... you really earned your money today".

When the best of the rest are eligible for free agency. Are they seriously hoping to remain in Green Bay?

What is going to be the overall quality of the team if Ted Thompson does miss on any future draft with this 'new model'?

Arn't the Green Bay Packers going to be merely a farm team? It's best roster players fodder for other NFL teams?

As Patler points out. The Green Bay Packer Organization chart has been hit heavily over the past recent years; with noteables now leading other NFL organizations. Take pause to think about that ...the implications of that.

Add this in.

You know this for yourselves and it's not to rub anything in. In the past two seasons the Green Bay Packers playoff record stands at 1W-2L.

After all of that. The bottom line:

Will signing two players to a combined salary CAP extention of $40 million$ offer any better gurantees? Will that move offer potential failure?

Ted Thompson cannot bite on any ... "Well ... Joe Flacco got whatever" crap. Ted Thompson has to prove to me that he's not only his own man..... but.... 'the MAN'.

GO PACKERS !

[Fritz]

Your getting this right Patler.

I want to place this LINK here because it looks at the CAP and a teams loyalty to veteren players of star (former star) quality, given the current tight salary cap restrictions.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9092135/nfl-mailbag-tight-salary-cap-squeezes-loyalty

Loyalty gets sqeezed by tight cap

Teams not willing to spend extra to retain their veteran leaders

Originally Published: March 24, 2013

By John Clayton | ESPN.com

The argument over Aaron Rodgers (Clay Matthews III) and their star status to the Green Bay Packers. Their by all accounts, proposed combined approximate $40 million$ cost to the current $123.9 million$ Salary Cap. Should be confined to a matter of simple math and common sense.

That, in terms of managing the Packer roster fairly.

In this post I'm not even going to chip in with anything BJ Raji. I'm seeing his status and future with the team differently as things currently stand. I have to see more off season developments before I can factor BJ Raji into this picture.

It gets simple in terms related to immediate and impending highly predictable impact :

Two players equals 3.8% of the roster.

$40 million$ equals *32.3% of the CAP.

Let's remove $7 million$ for the rookie class (8 players on our roster). **5.65% of the CAP.

* + ** = 37.95 % of the CAP for 10 roster spots.

43 roster spots (if money was devided evenly) get $1,788,372$ each.

Two players average $20 million$ each Vs 43 players averaging $1.78 million$ each.

Is that Green Bay Packer locker room going to be a very happy place?

After another loss to a non pretender:

"Gee Aaron... you really earned your money today".

When the best of the rest are eligible for free agency. Are they seriously hoping to remain in Green Bay?

What is going to be the overall quality of the team if Ted Thompson does miss on any future draft with this 'new model'?

Arn't the Green Bay Packers going to be merely a farm team? It's best roster players fodder for other NFL teams?

As Patler points out. The Green Bay Packer Organization chart has been hit heavily over the past recent years; with noteables now leading other NFL organizations. Take pause to think about that ...the implications of that.

Add this in.

You know this for yourselves and it's not to rub anything in. In the past two seasons the Green Bay Packers playoff record stands at 1W-2L.

After all of that. The bottom line:

Will signing two players to a combined salary CAP extention of $40 million$ offer any better gurantees? Will that move offer potential failure?

Ted Thompson cannot bite on any ... "Well ... Joe Flacco got whatever" crap. Ted Thompson has to prove to me that he's not only his own man..... but.... 'the MAN'.

GO PACKERS !


If you're Aaron Rodgers and you sign a contract for that kind of coin, you'd better be ready to be booed off the field every time you miss a throw or stand around and take a sack.

[smuggler]

I hope it's a 10 year deal with a big lump signing bonus so that we can play the money games that the other clubs do (In Rodgers case, anyhow) and not screw our cap to the tune of 40% on the two players.

[ThunderDan]

As Patler points out. The Green Bay Packer Organization chart has been hit heavily over the past recent years; with noteables now leading other NFL organizations. Take pause to think about that ...the implications of that.

Add this in.

You know this for yourselves and it's not to rub anything in. In the past two seasons the Green Bay Packers playoff record stands at 1W-2L.

After all of that. The bottom line:

Will signing two players to a combined salary CAP extention of $40 million$ offer any better gurantees? Will that move offer potential failure?

Ted Thompson cannot bite on any ... "Well ... Joe Flacco got whatever" crap. Ted Thompson has to prove to me that he's not only his own man..... but.... 'the MAN'.

GO PACKERS !

What Packers led an other organization in 2012?

Matt Flynn, Scott Wells, Darren Colledge?

Who will lead in 2013? Maybe Jennings if he stays healthy? Maybe Woodson if he get's picked up?

Why pick two seasons? Why not three? Then we are 5-2 in the playoffs with a Super Bowl Championship.


So you moan about losing all of these players that are leading other teams but than moan about keeping Arod and CMIII. I don't get it. I think TT has a much better handle on this team than either you or I. Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations?

[Patler]

What Packers led an other organization in 2012?

Matt Flynn, Scott Wells, Darren Colledge?

Who will lead in 2013? Maybe Jennings if he stays healthy? Maybe Woodson if he get's picked up?

Why pick two seasons? Why not three? Then we are 5-2 in the playoffs with a Super Bowl Championship.


So you moan about losing all of these players that are leading other teams but than moan about keeping Arod and CMIII. I don't get it. I think TT has a much better handle on this team than either you or I. Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations?

I think he was referring to my comment about losing Dorsey, McKenzie and Schneider. How will that affect the Packers ability to identify and acquire good, young and CHEAP talent to fill out the roster?

[ThunderDan]

I think he was referring to my comment about losing Dorsey, McKenzie and Schneider. How will that affect the Packers ability to identify and acquire good, young and CHEAP talent to fill out the roster?

It was so deep in his post that if that was the connection I didn't get it.

I think even with a lot of change in the front office Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson make a pretty good pair. And with all the other team's poaching our up-and-coming execs I would guess a lot of the bright talent would want to be groomed in GB to get jobs elsewhere.

When I was a golf pro I took an assistant's job at PGA West simply because with that on my resume I would at least have a door opened for me anywhere else I wanted to go.

[woodbuck27]

What Packers led an other organization in 2012?

Matt Flynn, Scott Wells, Darren Colledge?

Who will lead in 2013? Maybe Jennings if he stays healthy? Maybe Woodson if he get's picked up?

Why pick two seasons? Why not three? Then we are 5-2 in the playoffs with a Super Bowl Championship.


So you moan about losing all of these players that are leading other teams but than moan about keeping Arod and CMIII. I don't get it. I think TT has a much better handle on this team than either you or I. Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations?

"So you moan about losing all of these players that are leading other teams but than moan about keeping Arod and CMIII. I don't get it. I think TT has a much better handle on this team than either you or I. Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations?" ThunderDan

If your going to run with the dogs you better be able to bark like a dog.

Let's you and I get down to the brass tacks of your re-post to me. You want to get 'your corner store schoolyard junk fix' on me? You had better grow up fast; realize that's not going to happen.

Your not going to paint me in any corner where I don't belong. So do you want to proceed? That's not anything I would advise.

You don't even have to respond to the remainder of this post. I'll remind you that 'discretion is the better part of valour'.

" So you moan about losing all these players that are leading other teams "[/I]? ThunderDan

What are you talking about?

I'll call you out and bullshit on that, Thunderdan.

This piece of 'Drama Queen' crap from you, Thunderdan.

" Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations? " ThunderDan

Is there any news out there that anything of the sort is imminent? If there is please post that. I'm positive such news would be intriguing. :whaa:

GO PACK GO !

[ThunderDan]

"So you moan about losing all of these players that are leading other teams but than moan about keeping Arod and CMIII. I don't get it. I think TT has a much better handle on this team than either you or I. Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations?" ThunderDan

If your going to run with the dogs you better be able to bark like a dog.

Let's you and I get down to the brass tacks of your re-post to me.

Where I 'moan about losing all these players that are leading other teams'?

What are you talking about?

I'll call you out and bullshit on that, Thunderdan.

So let me get this straight, I'll ask question by question so I understand your answers.

Are you not complaing that TT spent to much on ARod?

Are you not complaing about using so much of the cap on CMIII and ARod?

If we use the money for ARod and CMIII don't we have to let other guys go?

Maybe I am mistaken when I read your posts because you have so many different articles inbedded in them.

[ThunderDan]

This piece of 'Drama Queen' crap from you, Thunderdan.

" Would you moan some more if we let ARod and CMIII go when they are leading other organizations? " ThunderDan

Is there any news out there that anything of the sort is imminent? If there is please post that. I'm positive such news would be intriguing. :whaa:

GO PACK GO !

On this thread weren't you complaining about TT paying ARod $25M? That that is too much for one player?

If we don't pay Arod doesn't it make sense that another team would sign him?

[ThunderDan]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9107196/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-getting-closer-massive-long-term-extension-according-sources

The rumor is the deal is close and Aaron Rodgers will become the highest paid player in NFL history. It's being reported that his contract extension will come in at 4 years and $100,000,000$ (that's alot of zeros).

If this is true? What is the real price to the Green Bay Packers and Packer fans? If this is true will we sensably shout BRAVO Ted Thompson? If this is true can we associate it with anything approaching the definition of intelligence?

OK this is simply a stupid rumor? Ted Thompson cannot be so stupid to pay out that much percentage of the Packers CAP for one man. I dont believe this rumor is true. It cannot be true on any level of logic.

It's simply a rumor, so ignore it.

This is your first post in this thread. Am I confused or are you confused?

[woodbuck27]

So let me get this straight, I'll ask question by question so I understand your answers.

Are you not complaing that TT spent to much on ARod?

Are you not complaing about using so much of the cap on CMIII and ARod?

If we use the money for ARod and CMIII don't we have to let other guys go?

Maybe I am mistaken when I read your posts because you have so many different articles inbedded in them.

Who do you imagine you are? The FBI or CIA?

I'll tell you who you appear to me. So far up your own ass in homerism it's a waste of my time to play with you.

Maybe that's not fair!? Maybe that's completely wrong?

Look at your questions in that last post. Not one of those questions is relevant to my concerns.

Has TT spent any more money (yet) on Aaron Rodgers and/or Clay Matthews III? I'm not aware that he did so how could I complain? That more than less answers your other questions ThunderDan.

If you have more than the inside track on all things 'HOMER and a Packer fan'? Please share that with me.

I'm not interested in silly immature mind/word games. In your obvious attempts; 'your fix' to discredit my efforts to post a simple wake up call to all Packer fans that read this forum.

GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

This is your first post in this thread. Am I confused or are you confused?

I'm going to ignore that with this exception.

I'm positive I'm NOT confused.

[woodbuck27]

Holy snappers !

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKulDhKPwN6wvTTCLj7f2xWrtIQTvBL Ux-Ai0glFS1iEb29F9w

I don't want this to bring 'the dogs out'.

[Fritz]

Who do you imagine you are? The FBI or CIA?

I'll tell you who you appear to me. So far up your own ass in homerism it's a waste of my time to play with you.

Maybe that's not fair!? Maybe that's completely wrong?

Look at your questions in that last post. Not one of those questions is relevant to my concerns.

Has TT spent any more money (yet) on Aaron Rodgers and/or Clay Matthews III? I'm not aware that he did so how could I complain? That more than less answers your other questions ThunderdDan.

If you have more than the inside track on all things 'HOMER and a Packer fan'? Please share that with me.

I'm not interested in silly immature mind/word games. In your obvious attempts; 'your fix' to discredit my efforts to post a simple wake up call to all Packer fans that read this forum.

GO PACK GO !

Are you off your meds again?

[denverYooper]

Cervantes would be proud.

[smuggler]

I'll give you one thing, woody -- you sure put a lot of time and effort into your posts.

[woodbuck27]

Are you off your meds again?

Sometimes 'homerism' gets me like a 'bite in the arse' attitude. Homerism often excludes insight into intelligence. LOL

Sometimes ' homerism ' changes me from this:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS01eu_SrWlzs6xZJHwMQ5lTAXECVeDz 1YTQfY4RCCrgrjsTfCy

To this: :!:

http://www.celebritiesfans.com/pictures/christopher_lloyd.jpg


With Tylenol. I took two before bed last night...never this:

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/getout/files/2011/12/back-to-the-future.jpg


Sometimes there's some crap that surfaces and it gets personal.

I wasn't raised to take any crap. I'm almost pure Canadian - Irish. I've learned this in life.

If anyone slings enough shit on a brick wall. Some of it will stick if you neglect to wash it off. I seldom bust ass or come down on someone; snorting like a fricken bull. I was gentle in that exchange.

Here's the real TRUTH. This isn't life and death stuff. The central parties that we concern ourselves with in this discussion will come out either looking good; stinking too high heaven or somewhere in between.

We won't all agree as concerns the result. I'm not presently aware there has been one. Until I do it's as I've expressed earlier in this thread.

A rumor... nothing else.

GO PACK GO!

[woodbuck27]

I'll give you one thing, woody -- you sure put a lot of time and effort into your posts.

smuggler ... you noticed. :-D

THANKS

I'm dedicated to Packerrats. I really care. I don't believe I've ever posted on another Packer forum since Mad kicked Packerrats up for us to enjoy.

I've been a Green Bay Packer fan for five and a half decades. That means going through all that was the 1970's and 80's. Those were really hard years to hold onto one team. I don't want to see one member on this forum suffer all that again.

GO PACK GO !

[smuggler]

It's all good, as long as you never get like this:

http://m5.paperblog.com/i/33/336613/top-six-creepiest-bad-guys-L-mTmugN.jpeg

JUST. LIKE. THIIIIIS.

[Upnorth]

Sorry to come to the party with out anything to add but has his contact even been signed?

[Guiness]

Sorry to come to the party with out anything to add but has his contact even been signed?

No, it hasn't, but it sure looks to be unavoidable.

With the money paid to Flacco and Romo, you really can't expect Rodgers to sign for any less. Add in Manning and Brees, and possibly Brady (I never did figure out what he got) and you've got 5 QBs making north of $20million/year. He's getting that, no question.

I said it somewhere else on this board, I think the next few years of the NFL are going to be interesting if the cap stays flat. Which teams are going to be consistently good? Those with a franchise, highly paid QB, one other star and some journeymen surrounding them, or teams with a middle of the road QB and many more above average players at the skill positions - made affordable because they have $10-15million more of cap space to play spend. Or door #3, teams with a steller rookie QB on his first contract?

A lot of players were asked to take pay cuts this year, and were threatened with being cut if they did not - Hawk took his, Dumervil didn't. That playing field needs to be leveled. Want to see something interesting? If a team wants to cut a player's salary, that player should be given x hours to shop himself around...and see if there are any takers at a salary above what he's being offered! The teams are 'negotiating', but the players aren't allowed to shop their services around. Unfair.

[woodbuck27]

No, it hasn't, but it sure looks to be unavoidable.

With the money paid to Flacco and Romo, you really can't expect Rodgers to sign for any less. Add in Manning and Brees, and possibly Brady (I never did figure out what he got) and you've got 5 QBs making north of $20million/year. He's getting that, no question.

I said it somewhere else on this board, I think the next few years of the NFL are going to be interesting if the cap stays flat. Which teams are going to be consistently good? Those with a franchise, highly paid QB, one other star and some journeymen surrounding them, or teams with a middle of the road QB and many more above average players at the skill positions - made affordable because they have $10-15million more of cap space to play spend. Or door #3, teams with a steller rookie QB on his first contract?

A lot of players were asked to take pay cuts this year, and were threatened with being cut if they did not - Hawk took his, Dumervil didn't. That playing field needs to be leveled. Want to see something interesting? If a team wants to cut a player's salary, that player should be given x hours to shop himself around...and see if there are any takers at a salary above what he's being offered! The teams are 'negotiating', but the players aren't allowed to shop their services around. Unfair.

Nice point Guiness. 'Unfair' it seems to me; might be the catch word of the near future in the NFL. Along with other more unflattering words.

I know one thing I'd certainly now have in place.

More emphasis on a solid backup QB. What have we got there?

The culture of the NFL is seeing a sudden change in terms of the cost of an elite QB to the teams CAP. I was watching films on MLB last night and the record contract signing of players like Barry Bonds; when he went over from the Pittsburg Pirates to the San Francisco GIANTS.

Comparing that contract with what Flacco, and now Romo signed. Barry Bonds playing a 162 game schedule in MLB and got half what Flacco and Romo were handed.

This payout to NFL QB's is simply 'sick money'. Some restraints have to be put in place. Owners or NFL GM's have certainly gone Bozzo on this one. Someone has to take a stand for the overall good of the game. Act in accordance with what fairness really is, in terms of 'the team'.

If I was the GM of the Green Bay Packers and Aaron Rodgers agent tried to handcuff my CAP, with the suggestion of $25 million$ per season for his client. He'd better enter my office, armed with a shield. I'd simply do the smart thing and tell him to get back to his egomaniacle client. Rethink his demands. Otherwise, go piss up on the nearest pole. That face of the franchise would be receiving a reality check from me. No one or two players are bigger than the team as a whole.

I consider this rumor of Aaron Rodgers and $25 Million$ per year as simply ridiculous. Accept that as a forgone conclusion. I treat it as propaganda.

I'd be fired before I would ever allow one man on my team to hog so much of the CAP. It's the general principle of fair play, that we're talking about here; not what Aaron Rodgers deserves or not, based on his level of play Vs any other NFL QB.

Someone has to simply use their brains. Someone simply has to have some balls. Balls to do the right thing.

I pray that man is Ted Thompson.

There's no man or woman on this board that can convince me that I'm wrong in my position and this silly to plain stupid rumor.

GO PACK GO!

[King Friday]

The teams are 'negotiating', but the players aren't allowed to shop their services around. Unfair.

The player can shop himself around as long as he wants to...all he has to do is turn down the "reduction" his team is offering and force them to cut him. Dumervil DID accept the pay cut...it was a paperwork snafu by his agent that caused him to be cut. This isn't some kind of new thing...it has happened for years. It will happen more and more when teams load up on overpriced FAs during the first week of free agency, because after a year or two those teams will be forced to realize that there actually WAS a reason why the player wasn't wanted by someone else and that they paid WAY TOO MUCH for them.

[Pugger]

It was so deep in his post that if that was the connection I didn't get it.

I think even with a lot of change in the front office Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson make a pretty good pair. And with all the other team's poaching our up-and-coming execs I would guess a lot of the bright talent would want to be groomed in GB to get jobs elsewhere.

When I was a golf pro I took an assistant's job at PGA West simply because with that on my resume I would at least have a door opened for me anywhere else I wanted to go.

You were a golf pro? Cool. :cool:

[Upnorth]

Didnt the nfl sign a to contract with a big jump in price in 2014? The cap won't stay flat with a big increase in tv revenue

[Upnorth]

Nice point Guiness. 'Unfair' it seems to me; might be the catch word of the near future in the NFL. Along with other more unflattering words.

I know one thing I'd certainly now have in place.

More emphasis on a solid backup QB. What have we got there?

The culture of the NFL is seeing a sudden change in terms of the cost of an elite QB to the teams CAP. I was watching films on MLB last night and the record contract signing of players like Barry Bonds; when he went over from the Pittsburg Pirates to the San Francisco GIANTS.

Comparing that contract with what Flacco, and now Romo signed. Barry Bonds playing a 162 game schedule in MLB and got half what Flacco and Romo were handed.

This payout to NFL QB's is simply 'sick money'. Some restraints have to be put in place. Owners or NFL GM's have certainly gone Bozzo on this one. Someone has to take a stand for the overall good of the game. Act in accordance with what fairness really is, in terms of 'the team'.

If I was the GM of the Green Bay Packers and Aaron Rodgers agent tried to handcuff my CAP, with the suggestion of $25 million$ per season for his client. He'd better enter my office, armed with a shield. I'd simply do the smart thing and tell him to get back to his egomaniacle client. Rethink his demands. Otherwise, go piss up on the nearest pole. That face of the franchise would be receiving a reality check from me. No one or two players are bigger than the team as a whole.

I consider this rumor of Aaron Rodgers and $25 Million$ per year as simply ridiculous. Accept that as a forgone conclusion. I treat it as propaganda.

I'd be fired before I would ever allow one man on my team to hog so much of the CAP. It's the general principle of fair play, that we're talking about here; not what Aaron Rodgers deserves or not, based on his level of play Vs any other NFL QB.

Someone has to simply use their brains. Someone simply has to have some balls. Balls to do the right thing.

I pray that man is Ted Thompson.

There's no man or woman on this board that can convince me that I'm wrong in my position and this silly to plain stupid rumor.

GO PACK GO!

Romo or flacco at 20 mil or arod at 25. Is he worth 5 more per year than those two?

[woodbuck27]

Romo or flacco at 20 mil or arod at 25. Is he worth 5 more per year than those two?

It's not at all about a comparitive value analysis.

It's more about impact on the CAP. It's based upon a simple reality check. About one man's share of the pie. On that basis, what's fair to the roster as a whole.

PACKERS!

[Guiness]

The player can shop himself around as long as he wants to...all he has to do is turn down the "reduction" his team is offering and force them to cut him. Dumervil DID accept the pay cut...it was a paperwork snafu by his agent that caused him to be cut. This isn't some kind of new thing...it has happened for years. It will happen more and more when teams load up on overpriced FAs during the first week of free agency, because after a year or two those teams will be forced to realize that there actually WAS a reason why the player wasn't wanted by someone else and that they paid WAY TOO MUCH for them.

But the teams have an unbalancing upper hand over the players in these negotiations.

There is a contract in place that the player has to play for. The team offers a lower contract in hopes of saving some money, and the player does not know, and can not test the market without first making a decision that will put him, at least temporarily, out of work and potentially have them making even less money. So the teams have the unbalancing advantage of having a player under contract (the original one) and getting them to transition to a new lower one, without the player ever hitting the open market and the player learning what his true value is, they have to guess. The teams aren't bidding against anyone for the new contract, and if the player declines and goes to FA, there is nothing to stop them from being one of the teams that make an offer to him - well, nothing except maybe a pissed off player who tells his agent to no pick up the phone when they call.

Take Hawk's 'renegotiation' as an example. I don't want to talk about his value, if he was overpaid, etc, that's not relevant to the way the restructuring played out. Hawk had a contract that was going to pay him $5.45 in 2013, the Packers offered him $3.6 million, a $1.85million drop. His options were to accept the new contract and make $3.6million, or walk away from that money and hope to do better - by negotiating with 31 teams that all talk to the Pack's exec at least a couple of times a year. He can't have talks or visit other teams to and see what else is out there. The NFL would call that tampering!

Just change the numbers a little bit so they are something us normal people can relate to, and see what that would be like! Imagine you have a job that pays you $50,000/year, and one day your boss says you have to work next year for $33K, or you get your walking papers. Oh, and he'll be at a meeting next week with all the other employers in town...where he could say whatever he wants, like you're and ass, don't shower have been seen to treat customers badly...

I know Dumervil wanted to accept the salary reduction, but the reality is that he did not, and as a result was cut.

[Guiness]

Romo or flacco at 20 mil or arod at 25. Is he worth 5 more per year than those two?

I'm looking at it from a different perspective - I don't much care what Romo and Flacco are making. I'm wondering if any player in a sport like football where
1. they are constantly reminding us both that it is a team sport,
2. you have to pay 53 guys, and
3. every play could be the last,
should make 20% of your payroll!

[pbmax]

To be fair, agents also encourage phony long term contracts with lots of bells and whistles to make good press. The do also need to guarantee money and get as much as possible up front or early in the contract, but headlines can help them recruit and keep talent.

So its not entirely on the owners. What I wonder is if agents or owners would more oppose a move to guaranteed money? There are benefits to both, but threats as well. Entire wings of the League Office and the teams' capologists would suddenly be unemployed.

[Upnorth]

I'm looking at it from a different perspective - I don't much care what Romo and Flacco are making. I'm wondering if any player in a sport like football where
1. they are constantly reminding us both that it is a team sport,
2. you have to pay 53 guys, and
3. every play could be the last,
should make 20% of your payroll!
While I don't disagree with your points if we don't pay him somewhere close to this someone else will. Are you comfortable with losing him? Who do you replace him with.

[Patler]

While I don't disagree with your points if we don't pay him somewhere close to this someone else will. Are you comfortable with losing him? Who do you replace him with.

They would have to start treating QB like other positions, and have a plan to lose the QB, just like losing any other position.

[Freak Out]

Time to draft a QB. :)

[Patler]

Time to draft a QB. :)

It would be nice to find a good one (assuming Coleman isn't one). Then, you could make Rodgers play out his contract, add in a year or two at the franchise price if necessary, then kick him to the curb and bring on his replacement!

[woodbuck27]

While I don't disagree with your points if we don't pay him somewhere close to this someone else will. Are you comfortable with losing him? Who do you replace him with.

My argument is that in no way should Aaron Rodgers get rewarded a flat out income of $25 Million$ per season when the current highest paid QB Joe Flacco got $20.1 million$ from the Baltimore Ravens.

Anyone who's applauding such an elevation over all other NFL QB contracts is simply 'out to lunch'.

It's just this simple. You want a gardener for your propety. Now a reputable gardener works just up the road for $10 bucks$ and hour. You bump into him and discuss him working every week for you. Do you offer to pay him $12.50/hour or $10.25 /hour?

Some posters here actually would be in a mad rush to offer that gardener $12.50. Yes he's a damn fine gardener but such an offer doesn't make good business sense.

How are the NFL QB's ranked at the present time ... Sun. March 31, 2013?

1. Joe Flacco $20.1 million$. A timely Super Bowl sealed this deal. A six-year, $120.6-million contract that included a guaranteed $52 million.

2. Drew Brees: $20.0 million$ Note: Brees received a five-year, $100million$ contract that included $60 million in guaranteed money.

The front-loaded contract paid DrewBrees $40 million in 2012.

3. Peyton Manning: $19.2 million$ based on a five year $96 million$ contract.

4. Tony Romo: $17.071 million$ (Tony Romo new contract... a six-year, $108 million extension with the Cowboys on top of the $11.5 million he's due to earn in 2013).

The deal includes $55 million guaranteed — or three million more than defending Super Bowl MVP Joe Flacco recently received from the Baltimore Ravens.

5. Eli Manning: $15.271 million$. Cashed in on a Super Bowl win. Good for a seven year $106.9 million$ contract.

6. Tom Brady: $14.12 million$ ... Poor Ole Tom! Trying to act sensable or be the nice guy lands him in sixth spot today.

The New England Patriots quarterback took a cut in his base salary to help the Patriots get under the salary cap. He received more guaranteed money, too $57 million over the next five years. Brady's contract calls for him to get $15 million in 2017. Not bad, as he was born on Aug. 03, 1977.

7. Philip Rivers: $14.036 million Based on his last seven year $98.25 million$ contract.

GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

It would be nice to find a good one (assuming Coleman isn't one). Then, you could make Rodgers play out his contract, add in a year or two at the franchise price if necessary, then kick him to the curb and bring on his replacement!

I will have such incredible respect for Ted Thompson if he makes that perfectly clear to Aaron Rodgers.

All this rush to give Aaron Rodgers a contract extension imminently. Is in my view premature. Both for Aaron Rodgers welfare; and more importantly the Green Bay Packers.

This season would have been better used, focusing on certain realities that might have more to do with flat out being more serious Super Bowl contenders.

With that as my position. I'm not going to argue with anyone the merits of whether or not that's the case.

It's too obvious we arn't there now. We're slipping behind more in 2013 unless alot of if's go 'just right'.

PACKERS !

[red]

after looking at all the contracts that have been signed lately, i'm pretty sure i can start to comment in this thread

first thing to remember, a-rods last contract was a "real money/ real deal". there was no phoney money in that contract at all. it was a six year deal, and it was set up as a 6 year deal, where he would make it all.

when you look at other players that sign 6 year massive contracts, i usually turns out to be, in reality, 3 year deals or so with massive amounts of fake money in the last years of the contract that the players will never honestly see. this is to inflate the ego of the player and nothing more.

examples

Flacco signed a 6 year 120 million dollar deal with 52 million "guaranteed". this is all smoke and mirrors. he gets a 29 million dollar signing bonus, this is the only money he is "guaranteed" to get. the other 23 million "guaranteed" is guaranteed against injury only and is in the form of roster or option bonuses. meaning if he's cut before he sucks, he doesn't get it.

his pro rated cap hit over 5 years is 5.8 million a year

his cap hits are

2013- 6.8 million. 1 million salary and 5.8 pro rated signing bonus
2014- 14.8 million 6 million salary, 5.8 PRSB and a roster bonus of 3 million
2015- 14.55 million 4 million salary, 5.8 PRSB 4.75 roster bonus

2016- 28.55 million 18 in salary, 5.8 PRSB, 4.75 roster bonus
2017 - 31.15 million 20.6 salary, 5.8 signing bonus, 4.75 roster bonus
2018- 24.75 20 for salary, 4.75 roster

its really a 3 year 47.75 million dollar deal or 15.9 million a year(29 million signing bonus+(2013+2014+2015 salary)+ 2014 and 1015 roster bonuses

he will either be told to restructure after 2015 or he'll be cut. the penalty for releasing him would be 11.6 million. or if you use the june 1st rule you can spread the hit over two years

[red]

peyton manning is a much more realistic number to look at. there is on phoney money anywhere in that contracts. no signing bonus, no roster bonuses. his contract is all salary, he can be cut at any time or retire with no cap penalties.

last year he made and his cap number was 18 million, this year and next it will be 20 million

a-rod will get the same type of "cash" that the other guys get, but i don't think the numbers are gonna look as stupid as theirs do

[Guiness]

Good analysis/layout Red.

I think your guess on Flacco is correct - probably a 3 year deal. The cap should change when the new TV contract kicks in in 2014, roughly doubling the money from that, but will it be enough? I'd say the Ravens have built in both an escape clause and the possibility of keeping Flacco if the cap does something like take a 40% jump.

PM made $18 and $20M. If you are right, and that is an accurate reflection of the market, then Rodgers gets a little more than that.

[red]

he's an attempt at a possible a-rod contract

4 year extension like we've heard. i'm gonna give him a 4 year 95 million dollar extension (new money) with a 40 million dollar signing bonus


year salary signing bonus misc bonus cap hit

2013 9.25 8 500,000 17.75
2014 10.5 8 500,000 19.00
2015 10 8 18
2016 10 8 18
2017 15 8 23
2018 15 0 5,000,000 20

not horrible looking. you also completely guarantee 2013 and 2014, meaning the deal has 65 million "guaranteed". he will also make about 70 million over the next 3 years making him the highest paid player in the nfl (as of right now)

only one year ever gets above the 20 million dollar mark and by 2017 that number could look small

just a first attempt, theres a lot of playing around to be had there

[Guiness]

While I don't disagree with your points if we don't pay him somewhere close to this someone else will. Are you comfortable with losing him? Who do you replace him with.

And we're all just guessing, of course. Will Rodgers demand that much because he needs 'respect' à la Flacco? We haven't seen that type of behaviour out of Rodgers, but who knows. Jennings certainly surprised me this off-season, so never say never.

I hope not, but if he does and there is someone else out there who will pay him it...I also hope TT get 3 first round choices for him! Cincy got a first and second for a 'retired' QB, so...!

[woodbuck27]

after looking at all the contracts that have been signed lately, i'm pretty sure i can start to comment in this thread

first thing to remember, a-rods last contract was a "real money/ real deal". there was no phoney money in that contract at all. it was a six year deal, and it was set up as a 6 year deal, where he would make it all.

when you look at other players that sign 6 year massive contracts, i usually turns out to be, in reality, 3 year deals or so with massive amounts of fake money in the last years of the contract that the players will never honestly see. this is to inflate the ego of the player and nothing more.

examples

Flacco signed a 6 year 120 million dollar deal with 52 million "guaranteed". this is all smoke and mirrors. he gets a 29 million dollar signing bonus, this is the only money he is "guaranteed" to get. the other 23 million "guaranteed" is guaranteed against injury only and is in the form of roster or option bonuses. meaning if he's cut before he sucks, he doesn't get it.

his pro rated cap hit over 5 years is 5.8 million a year

his cap hits are

2013- 6.8 million. 1 million salary and 5.8 pro rated signing bonus
2014- 14.8 million 6 million salary, 5.8 PRSB and a roster bonus of 3 million
2015- 14.55 million 4 million salary, 5.8 PRSB 4.75 roster bonus

2016- 28.55 million 18 in salary, 5.8 PRSB, 4.75 roster bonus
2017 - 31.15 million 20.6 salary, 5.8 signing bonus, 4.75 roster bonus
2018- 24.75 20 for salary, 4.75 roster

its really a 3 year 47.75 million dollar deal or 15.9 million a year(29 million signing bonus+(2013+2014+2015 salary)+ 2014 and 1015 roster bonuses

he will either be told to restructure after 2015 or he'll be cut. the penalty for releasing him would be 11.6 million. or if you use the june 1st rule you can spread the hit over two years

Nice work red.

Alot of work went into that post and the example post RE: Aaron Rodgers possible new contract. It works out to so much less than a $25 million per season CAP hit.

PACKERS !

[King Friday]

I would be surprised if Rodgers does a deal that is $25M a year. He doesn't seem to be a guy obsessed with being the first $25M guy or something like that, and the Packers are set up to actually be able to pay him what he's worth without doing a funny money contract. He recognizes that championships are what will ultimately define him, and every additional $1M he takes is less money the team has to surround him with capable talent. I'm guessing he would be fine with any deal that makes him the highest paid player in the game, because that is what he deserves. I doubt he will seek to hamstring the Packers with a deal that will handicap their ability to keep good young players on the roster.

I agree with Red. My guess is we'll see an extension out to 6 years worth around $120M...and Rodgers will be likely to see virtually all of the money in that contract. Unlike Manning, he'll get a reasonable signing bonus that will have to be prorated...but I'm guessing it won't be huge and the contract will be more frontloaded the first year instead, which in essence is guaranteed since I'm about 99.999999% certain Rodgers will be on the opening day roster for the Packers in 2013.

[pbmax]

Correct me if I'm wrong (likely possibility) but isn't Rodgers signed for another two years at around 12mil/year? If so, it simply means he's extended with a new average over the next six years to an average of just over 20mil/year which seems pretty reasonable. Especially if they front load a bit this year and then the cap goes up in 2015 with the new TV deal.

Good call Spaulding.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/31/romo-contract-underscores-importance-of-new-deal-for-rodgers/

[red]

Good call Spaulding.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/31/romo-contract-underscores-importance-of-new-deal-for-rodgers/

florio like many people on here are trying to compare a cap number to a salary number. big difference

[Mazzin]

Nfl.com currently has an article up, saying that the negotiations are at about a 2 million dollar difference. Am I allowed to provide the link or no?

[Patler]

florio like many people on here are trying to compare a cap number to a salary number. big difference

You are correct, generalities are not often accurate in discussing player contracts, but sometimes they can be som,ewhat enlightening, especially if the contract is relatively short. Depends on the details and whether the discussion is about the entire contract, or the impact at a given time during the contract. Sometimes the difference is negligible.

It can also be deceiving to look at salary as player income, because we all know that bonuses can be a huge part of it. That's why the arguments of a player "outplaying his contract" based on what his salary is that year is meaningless. Javon Walker's disagreement with GB was a good example of that. The more telling analysis is comparing performance to date and total compensation to date. Walker didn't look as much underpaid after 3 years when everything was considered.

[pbmax]

I think Rodgers case is an easier one for speculation than many for several reasons.

The Packers don't jam pack contracts with funny money often. The term being discusses (4 year extension) doesn't get into absurd assumptions about being able to play until he is forty. And we have 4 comparable deals that that details are well known (Brady, Manning, Brees and Flacco) and a recent one where just one detail is know (Romo's guarantees). There are few injury concerns beyond the normal uncertainty (unlike Manning).

Red's breakdown of Rodgers current deal is a good example of the straightforward approach Thompson generally uses.

Now the cap situation and the presence of Matthews and Raji's new contracts might force the packers to backload some of this and hope/pray for the cap to increase. We also don't know their projections of player costs.

But I think we can put some faith in the round numbers we have. The extension by itself would be around $25 mil per year but if, as seems likely, they add it to the existing contract, that average looks like it could be below $21 mil per year.

The differences between cap numbers and real money will be less here than with Romo and probably Flacco. It will be more a question of when the cap hits occur. Any money past three years needs to be evaluated for injury/inability to play anymore considerations too.

[woodbuck27]

Nfl.com currently has an article up, saying that the negotiations are at about a 2 million dollar difference. Am I allowed to provide the link or no?

Sure Mazzin...Fire that LINK to us.

It's OK to post LINKs here but never the entire article content.

[woodbuck27]

after looking at all the contracts that have been signed lately, i'm pretty sure i can start to comment in this thread

first thing to remember, a-rods last contract was a "real money/ real deal". there was no phoney money in that contract at all. it was a six year deal, and it was set up as a 6 year deal, where he would make it all.

when you look at other players that sign 6 year massive contracts, i usually turns out to be, in reality, 3 year deals or so with massive amounts of fake money in the last years of the contract that the players will never honestly see. this is to inflate the ego of the player and nothing more.

examples

Flacco signed a 6 year 120 million dollar deal with 52 million "guaranteed". this is all smoke and mirrors. he gets a 29 million dollar signing bonus, this is the only money he is "guaranteed" to get. the other 23 million "guaranteed" is guaranteed against injury only and is in the form of roster or option bonuses. meaning if he's cut before he sucks, he doesn't get it.

his pro rated cap hit over 5 years is 5.8 million a year

his cap hits are

2013- 6.8 million. 1 million salary and 5.8 pro rated signing bonus
2014- 14.8 million 6 million salary, 5.8 PRSB and a roster bonus of 3 million
2015- 14.55 million 4 million salary, 5.8 PRSB 4.75 roster bonus

2016- 28.55 million 18 in salary, 5.8 PRSB, 4.75 roster bonus
2017 - 31.15 million 20.6 salary, 5.8 signing bonus, 4.75 roster bonus
2018- 24.75 20 for salary, 4.75 roster

its really a 3 year 47.75 million dollar deal or 15.9 million a year(29 million signing bonus+(2013+2014+2015 salary)+ 2014 and 1015 roster bonuses

he will either be told to restructure after 2015 or he'll be cut. the penalty for releasing him would be 11.6 million. or if you use the june 1st rule you can spread the hit over two years

Yes red. You've got that modeled right. Is it based on actual contract figures?

I'm reading a ton of stuff lately and cannot determine if I read that info. or not.

Would you please respond with the LINK for those contract numbers.

Thanks.

GO PACKERS !

[Mazzin]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000156309/article/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-closing-in-on-new-contract

Seems crazy, i would think both sides know the value.

[Patler]

I think Rodgers case is an easier one for speculation than many for several reasons.

The Packers don't jam pack contracts with funny money often. The term being discusses (4 year extension) doesn't get into absurd assumptions about being able to play until he is forty. And we have 4 comparable deals that that details are well known (Brady, Manning, Brees and Flacco) and a recent one where just one detail is know (Romo's guarantees). There are few injury concerns beyond the normal uncertainty (unlike Manning).

Red's breakdown of Rodgers current deal is a good example of the straightforward approach Thompson generally uses.

Now the cap situation and the presence of Matthews and Raji's new contracts might force the packers to backload some of this and hope/pray for the cap to increase. We also don't know their projections of player costs.

But I think we can put some faith in the round numbers we have. The extension by itself would be around $25 mil per year but if, as seems likely, they add it to the existing contract, that average looks like it could be below $21 mil per year.

The differences between cap numbers and real money will be less here than with Romo and probably Flacco. It will be more a question of when the cap hits occur. Any money past three years needs to be evaluated for injury/inability to play anymore considerations too.

The Packers have had a pay-as-you-go approach for quite some time. Even Brett Favre's last Packer contract, which was for 10 years and made him the league's highest paid player, was pretty simple and straightforward. About the most extravagant contracts details that I can recall recently where the unusual roster bonuses for both Mike Wahlel and AJ Hawk that resulted in each being released. Typically, the Packers do not include unrealistic payments to artificially inflate the value of contracts.

In some ways, I wish the Packers were considering a longer contract with Rogers. With only a four-year extension, another mega-deal will be required in the not too distant future, and after he wins another two or three super Bowls his price will only go up! :grin:

[woodbuck27]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000156309/article/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-closing-in-on-new-contract

Seems crazy, i would think both sides know the value.

Reading that makes me feel comfortable that Ted Thompson will not sell out to any possibility of greed on the other side. That he's not going to reward Aaron Rodgers' with any more than is a solid business arrangement. Aaron Rodgers will be rewarded with slightly more sheckles per season than Joe Flacco. Now here's the qualifier of legitimacy **.

If it was me as Packer GM and Joe Flacco at $20.1 Million$. My offer would work out to $20.2 million$ for Aaron Rodgers. Of course, that might have to be re-negotiated as future QB payout trends go; in terms specific to Aaron Rodgers performance.

I'm getting double comfort. Reading between the lines informs me that Aaron Rodgers' agent David Dunn, is acting reasonably and in good faith as concerns the Green Bay Packers salary CAP.

** Nothing is perfect and that $2 million$ discrepency alarms me in terms of definition or application. ;-)

GO PACKERS !

[red]

Yes red. You've got that modeled right. Is it based on actual contract figures?

I'm reading a ton of stuff lately and cannot determine if I read that info. or not.

Would you please respond with the LINK for those contract numbers.

Thanks.

GO PACKERS !

yes, it is all the real numbers

i get all my cap numbers and info from spotrac.com. best site i've found

[woodbuck27]

yes, it is all the real numbers

i get all my cap numbers and info from spotrac.com. best site i've found

I've got their homepage on my taskbar right now.

Thanks red.

I just added this to my Aaron Rodgers file. :grin:

Joe Flacco:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/joe-flacco/

[pbmax]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/01/packers-rodgers-2-million-a-year-apart-as-contract-talks-continue/

$2 million a year apart doesn't sound like much, but that amount kept Brees and the Saints busy for six months.

[woodbuck27]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/01/packers-rodgers-2-million-a-year-apart-as-contract-talks-continue/

$2 million a year apart doesn't sound like much, but that amount kept Brees and the Saints busy for six months.

$2 million$ X 4 years = $8 million$ or just a tad better than the cost of one rookie crop.

A $2 million$ difference might be referring to the diff. bet. an avg. annual income of $21.2 million$ and $23.2 million$

Worse .... $23.2 million$ and $25.2 million$.

Talking differences and an amount of money such as $2 million$. Your not referring to a mole hill.

[Mazzin]

Love seeing this side of him. Plus his videos for the Macc fund were good. Plus I never saw the E:60 on him which is also after one of the videos.

[LEWCWA]

My argument is that in no way should Aaron Rodgers get rewarded a flat out income of $25 Million$ per season when the current highest paid QB Joe Flacco got $20.1 million$ from the Baltimore Ravens.

Anyone who's applauding such an elevation over all other NFL QB contracts is simply 'out to lunch'.

It's just this simple. You want a gardener for your propety. Now a reputable gardener works just up the road for $10 bucks$ and hour. You bump into him and discuss him working every week for you. Do you offer to pay him $12.50/hour or $10.25 /hour?

Some posters here actually would be in a mad rush to offer that gardener $12.50. Yes he's a damn fine gardener but such an offer doesn't make good business sense.

How are the NFL QB's ranked at the present time ... Sun. March 31, 2013?

1. Joe Flacco $20.1 million$. A timely Super Bowl sealed this deal. A six-year, $120.6-million contract that included a guaranteed $52 million.

2. Drew Brees: $20.0 million$ Note: Brees received a five-year, $100million$ contract that included $60 million in guaranteed money.

The front-loaded contract paid DrewBrees $40 million in 2012.

3. Peyton Manning: $19.2 million$ based on a five year $96 million$ contract.

4. Tony Romo: $17.071 million$ (Tony Romo new contract... a six-year, $108 million extension with the Cowboys on top of the $11.5 million he's due to earn in 2013).

The deal includes $55 million guaranteed — or three million more than defending Super Bowl MVP Joe Flacco recently received from the Baltimore Ravens.

5. Eli Manning: $15.271 million$. Cashed in on a Super Bowl win. Good for a seven year $106.9 million$ contract.

6. Tom Brady: $14.12 million$ ... Poor Ole Tom! Trying to act sensable or be the nice guy lands him in sixth spot today.

The New England Patriots quarterback took a cut in his base salary to help the Patriots get under the salary cap. He received more guaranteed money, too $57 million over the next five years. Brady's contract calls for him to get $15 million in 2017. Not bad, as he was born on Aug. 03, 1977.

7. Philip Rivers: $14.036 million Based on his last seven year $98.25 million$ contract.

GO PACK GO !


It isn't 25 million per year it is a 4 year 100 million extension with the 2 years he has left on his contract, big difference. 6 at 125 is right in line with what Rodgers will command in the open market. QB's are a different animal than other positions, No other position is harder to fill. Some of you are very spoiled since GB has had hall of fame production at this position for 20+ years.....The guy is going to get going rate, I would be inclined to lock him up for longer as the value will just keep climbing.

[woodbuck27]

It isn't 25 million per year it is a 4 year 100 million extension with the 2 years he has left on his contract, big difference. 6 at 125 is right in line with what Rodgers will command in the open market. QB's are a different animal than other positions, No other position is harder to fill. Some of you are very spoiled since GB has had hall of fame production at this position for 20+ years.....The guy is going to get going rate, I would be inclined to lock him up for longer as the value will just keep climbing.

We're trying to stay on top of this but the hard number will be determined by Ted Thompson.

My position is that $25 million per season for Aaron Rodgers (right now) is outrageous.

As a Packer fan I don't want the final hard number per season to exceed **$21 million$.

The part about locking him up for more than a 4 year extention. Mustn't raise that ** number, in reference to the present salary CAP.

PACKERS !

[NewsBruin]

I have no relevant reason to post this, but I think it's silly anytime I see a poster put up a "Aaron Rogers is the kind of guy who would..."

I don't know A-Rod, and I don't think any of us sit with him and discuss motivation over a Pizza Hut Big Dinner Box and a bowl of Wheaties until we do a State Farm Discount Double Check to describe our fullness. All I know of the Fable of A-Rod is that he's been chippy since junior college (justifiably so), and he's won one Super Bowl. Anything beyond that is just us projecting ourselves onto his life.

I predict Aaron Rogers is going to want a below/fair/above-market contract, and he's going to let his agent be the bad guy about it to Ted, while he stays mum to the media.

[woodbuck27]

I have no relevant reason to post this, but I think it's silly anytime I see a poster put up a "Aaron Rogers is the kind of guy who would..."

I don't know A-Rod, and I don't think any of us sit with him and discuss motivation over a Pizza Hut Big Dinner Box and a bowl of Wheaties until we do a State Farm Discount Double Check to describe our fullness. All I know of the Fable of A-Rod is that he's been chippy since junior college (justifiably so), and he's won one Super Bowl. Anything beyond that is just us projecting ourselves onto his life.

I predict Aaron Rogers is going to want a below/fair/above-market contract, and he's going to let his agent be the bad guy about it to Ted, while he stays mum to the media.

"...he's going to let his agent be the bad guy about it to Ted, while he stays mum to the media."

Then he learned something from his predecessor at the QB position in Green Bay.

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000157045/article/clay-matthews-offer-exceeds-13m-per-from-packers


Rapoport was told that the Packers' latest offer to Matthews already eclipses DeMarcus Ware's six-year, $78 million contract worth $13 million annually.

In other words, Matthews will become the highest-paid pass-rushing linebacker in the league.

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported last week that "everything is in place" for the Packers to put the finishing touches on Matthews' contract. In which case, Thompson could have his best offensive and defensive players locked up with long-term contracts before the 2013 NFL draft later this month.

Remember when we had $18M in cap space?

[Freak Out]

Those were the days baby!

[woodbuck27]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000157045/article/clay-matthews-offer-exceeds-13m-per-from-packers



Remember when we had $18M in cap space?

Approx. 3.8 % of the roster will get 31% of the salary CAP... 'ballpark'.

Now ... there's a definition of pressure.

[red]

Approx. 3.8 % of the roster will get 31% of the salary CAP... 'ballpark'.

Now ... there's a definition of pressure.

and on the flipside

about 55 or 60 % of the roster are going to be taking up about 10 or 15% of the cap

ballpark

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Vikings would gladly pay Rodgers $23M/year. They are already paying Allen a similar amount as Matthews will get.

[pbmax]

Schefter's Tweet on this Matthews info says the new will average more than $13 million per season. He has only one year left but its well south of $13 mil. Will be interesting to see what it is on balance.

[Pugger]

Yes it has to be something like that.

He will get a massive gurantee but a flat out $25 million$ per season - whatever length extension - is simply outrageous money. I believe that the Green Bay Packers are smarter than that.

It doesn't make sense that Ted Thompson would want to lock this one up now. At the same time come closer to breaking the bank to sign Aaron Rodgers. Aaron Rodgers contract has to be considered as a business decision not a reward.

It cannot be anything like:

There look at that. Aaron Rodgers makes $25 million$ per year as he's the best QB in the NFL....best QB ever in the NFL or anything like that. Yes he deserves a top contract but not 25% more than the highest contract of any other NFL QB. Both sides should to be reasonable/fair in overall regards.

All NFL Team GM eyes's will be on this story. It's certainly an interesting one.

GO PACK GO !

Unless TT doesn't want to wait until the price for an elite QB goes even higher! :shock:

[woodbuck27]

Unless TT doesn't want to wait until the price for an elite QB goes even higher! :shock:

If that happened ie Matt Ryan and certainly Jay Cutler.

Wouldn't that be seriously MAD money that Ted Thompson would ignore?

The Green Bay Packers see a need for fairness and Aaron Rodgers current contract. That gets taken care of or shaped up before the situation becomes over stressful.

Your running low on gas you fill your tank. You don't fill your tank... and... a couple of PVC containers for storage in the trunk.

PACKERS !

[MadScientist]

Approx. 3.8 % of the roster will get 31% of the salary CAP... 'ballpark'.

Now ... there's a definition of pressure.
It's definitely a risk. Atlanta just had to release their starting right tackle to free up some cap space to sign Ryan. TT has been very smart with the cap, but the numbers are painting him into a corner now.

[Guiness]

It's definitely a risk. Atlanta just had to release their starting right tackle to free up some cap space to sign Ryan. TT has been very smart with the cap, but the numbers are painting him into a corner now.

Colour me confused. If the RT was playing well, and his contract wasn't ridiculous, this is nothing but counter-productive to building a solid team.

As I've mentioned in other posts, I think this is just crazy.

[MadScientist]

Colour me confused. If the RT was playing well, and his contract wasn't ridiculous, this is nothing but counter-productive to building a solid team.

As I've mentioned in other posts, I think this is just crazy.

The RT was rated as the 5th best RT, but he is 32 years old and one article suggested he was declining. I couldn't find any injury info about him. He was set to make 4.5M this year.

[pbmax]

Ryan's deal supposedly is making progress. No leak on possible numbers that I have seen. Yet.

[gbgary]

without reading through all the posts (lazy ass) i'll ask this: i'm no capologist, and tell me if i'm wrong, but i'm thinking the bigger the singing bonus (guaranteed money) the less the cap hit will be. no? if so the Packers should write AR a huge check.

[Smeefers]

without reading through all the posts (lazy ass) i'll ask this: i'm no capologist, and tell me if i'm wrong, but i'm thinking the bigger the singing bonus (guaranteed money) the less the cap hit will be. no? if so the Packers should write AR a huge check.

The signing bonus is money that is given right away, but is spread equally over up to 4 years (maybe five). The biggest cap hit is the guaranteed money. Then there's two types of bonus'. There's bonus' that are likely to be made (making the pro bowl, 4000 yards, 20+ touchdowns, etc) and there's bonus' unlikely (super bowl mvp, 5000+ yards, 40+ touchdowns, etc). The likely bonus is counted against the cap. The unlikely isn't counted.

The difference Rodgers and the team have right now is in guaranteed money. The packers offered a total contract of around 21.5 a year, Rodgers wants 23.5 so that it would be harder for teams to leapfrog his contract number and he wouldn't be #1 any more. Rodgers has already stated that he's not going to hold out. There's a ton of time left on his contract, it's no rush. It's not like Rodgers is actively negotiating, that's what his agent is for. Every once in a while the agent comes to Aaron with a number and either says "take it" or "we can get more" and they go on from there. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't get signed until the middle of the season.

The only thing that would put a rush on it is if Aaron wanted to get paid now, if he was anxious to get the big check, he'd have to get the deal done before the season started. If that was the case, he would have to hold out in order to force the teams hand. Theoretically, the team has all of this season and all of next season to get a deal done.

[pbmax]

The bigger the signing bonus, the more you are counting on the cap to increase in subsequent years. And no less an authority than Bob Kraft has said the CBA, even after TV money kicks in for 2014 is going to rise slower than before. So expectations of increases like we saw twice in the 2000's are going to prove optimistic.

That is not to say you couldn't do it. But it makes a renegotiation more likely.

[woodbuck27]

The signing bonus is money that is given right away, but is spread equally over up to 4 years (maybe five). The biggest cap hit is the guaranteed money. Then there's two types of bonus'. There's bonus' that are likely to be made (making the pro bowl, 4000 yards, 20+ touchdowns, etc) and there's bonus' unlikely (super bowl mvp, 5000+ yards, 40+ touchdowns, etc). The likely bonus is counted against the cap. The unlikely isn't counted.

The difference Rodgers and the team have right now is in guaranteed money. The packers offered a total contract of around 21.5 a year, Rodgers wants 23.5 so that it would be harder for teams to leapfrog his contract number and he wouldn't be #1 any more. Rodgers has already stated that he's not going to hold out. There's a ton of time left on his contract, it's no rush. It's not like Rodgers is actively negotiating, that's what his agent is for. Every once in a while the agent comes to Aaron with a number and either says "take it" or "we can get more" and they go on from there. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't get signed until the middle of the season.

The only thing that would put a rush on it is if Aaron wanted to get paid now, if he was anxious to get the big check, he'd have to get the deal done before the season started. If that was the case, he would have to hold out in order to force the teams hand. Theoretically, the team has all of this season and all of next season to get a deal done.

Good post.

I cannot imagine that Aaron Rodgers is in any financial bind. Obviously there is no rush and for Aaron Rodgers best interests there, shouldn't be.

He and his agent ( David Dunn) should now be watching to see what Matt Ryan gets from the Falcons. Maybe? what Jay Cutler might pry out of da Bears.

PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

The bigger the signing bonus, the more you are counting on the cap to increase in subsequent years. And no less an authority than Bob Kraft has said the CBA, even after TV money kicks in for 2014 is going to rise slower than before. So expectations of increases like we saw twice in the 2000's are going to prove optimistic.

That is not to say you couldn't do it. But it makes a renegotiation more likely.

That is the 'real focus' of this new contract talk RE: Aaron Rodgers. It's overall impact on our CAP.

[woodbuck27]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/03/aaron-rodgers-excited-about-his-offense-mum-about-his-contract/

Aaron Rodgers excited about his offense, mum about his contract

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 3, 2013, 10:40 AM EDT


GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

Good post.

I cannot imagine that Aaron Rodgers is in any financial bind. Obviously there is no rush and for Aaron Rodgers best interests there, shouldn't be.

He and his agent ( David Dunn) should now be watching to see what Matt Ryan gets from the Falcons. Maybe? what Jay Cutler might pry out of da Bears.

PACKERS !

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/04/thomas-dimitroff-somethings-around-the-corner-with-matt-ryan/

Thomas Dimitroff: Something’s “around the corner” with Matt Ryan’s contract

Posted by Josh Alper on April 4, 2013, 10:41 AM EDT

[QBME]

Well, the latest report out of Green Bay, from inside the Packers organization, is that Aaron Rodgers is going to get a billion dollars:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9163182/aj-hawk-green-bay-packers-says-quarterback-aaron-rodgers-worth-every-penny

Unless this contract is carefully structured, it will put the Pack in cap hell for quite some time. There is no mention of what part of the billion dollars will be bonus money or guaranteed.

[Fritz]

As a long-time hater of the Detroit Lions, one of the things I'm most excited about regarding this contract is that once Rodgers is signed to it, the next move out of Detroit will probably be for Matthew Stafford's agent to try to top it. And the Lions, being the Lions, might just go for it. They're already renegotiating contracts to be able to fit Reggie Bush et al under the cap, and while they seem to have about six mill under now, in future years they are going to owe a whole lot of dough to a number of players who are probably not going to be worth that kind of cash.

[Upnorth]

If the contract was way out of line with everything else for a starting QB in this league then I could understand all the gnashing of teeth but it is about 10% above the current market. 10% for arguably the best is a good investment. 2 years from now it might look cheap. If we were the only team doing this it would be different but...

[woodbuck27]

If the contract was way out of line with everything else for a starting QB in this league then I could understand all the gnashing of teeth but it is about 10% above the current market. 10% for arguably the best is a good investment. 2 years from now it might look cheap. If we were the only team doing this it would be different but...

Yes but 10% of $20 million$ is $2 million$ not $5 million$ to a conservative (compared with any newer rumor) yet still, very scary speculative $25 million$.

If I'm Aaron Rodgers GM. He gets right now...today ! An offer of $20.5 million$ per year and that's the biscuit.

If his agent asks for more than $20.5 million$. He's talking to the back of my hand, as I flick him away.

PACKERS !

[Guiness]

Yes but 10% of $20 million$ is $2 million$ not $5 million$ to a conservative (compared with any newer rumor) yet still, very scary speculative $25 million$.

If I'm Aaron Rodgers GM. He gets right now...today ! An offer of $20.5 million$ per year and that's the biscuit.

If his agent asks for more than $20.5 million$. He's talking to the back of my hand, as I flick him away.

PACKERS !

While I'm damn sure negotiations will go nothing like that, the Packers do hold some significant cards. He's got 2 years left under his current deal, which could be followed by 2 tagged years. I think that will prevent any hardball being played by Rodger's agent.

[ThunderDan]

You and I just began that discussion Fritz...right here.

My point is that there is `no ìt`RE: just a rumor. Thus it`s easy to ignore.

Ted Thompson will not sell out to Aaron Rodgers.

Ted Thompson will not sell out to any rumored Aaron Rodgers ego desire.

Aaron Rodgers (and his agent) nor Ted Thompson is so stupid to anchor the Packer salary CAP with such an exorbitant contract for Aaron Rodgers. Such a contract is simply silly.

That rumor is like nails. It would be like me handing you nails and saying to you to use them to nail your own coffin.

Stupid and silly.

BUMP.

[woodbuck27]

While I'm damn sure negotiations will go nothing like that, the Packers do hold some significant cards. He's got 2 years left under his current deal, which could be followed by 2 tagged years. I think that will prevent any hardball being played by Rodger's agent.

It looks to me (excuse this)... that my position was right in terms of reality.

TT offers a tad more than $20.1 million$... $21 million.

The Aaron Rodgers side comes back with that reported $2 million$ difference....or $23 million$.

The longer the wait.... the more greedy Aaron Rodgers is perceived.

He might have signed early last week a few days before the draft. So 'not' to cause any distraction. That signing...drug on a few days too long. The announcement crowded the draft. That distraction the worst of two 'sorta evils' ... depended on fan perception.

The worst being a mixup or confusion in terms of perception.

a) A normal human being and wanting help on the OL for his health. Aaron Rodgers isn't worth anything concussed or otherwise on the sidelines. In that case the Packers finish last in the NFCN.

b) Maybe some fans idea... that the defense should be somewhat compromised for Aaron Rodgers stats. I would hope that's in 'no way the case'.

GO PACK GO !

[RashanGary]

Woodbuck, there are an awful lot of decisions made that aren't highly influenced by ego driven motives.

AR ended up with 18.6M/year over his 7 year deal. He didn't rake us over the coals, man.



This is been a drama free zone with AR. Let's try not to create drama where there is none.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHjFxJVeCQs

[Guiness]

It looks to me (excuse this)... that my position was right in terms of reality.

TT offers a tad more than $20.1 million$... $21 million.

The Aaron Rodgers side comes back with that reported $2 million$ difference....or $23 million$.

The longer the wait.... the more greedy Aaron Rodgers is perceived.

He might have signed early last week a few days before the draft. So 'not' to cause any distraction. That signing...drug on a few days too long. The announcement crowded the draft. That distraction the worst of two 'sorta evils' ... depended on fan perception.

The worst being a mixup or confusion in terms of perception.

a) A normal human being and wanting help on the OL for his health. Aaron Rodgers isn't worth anything concussed or otherwise on the sidelines. In that case the Packers finish last in the NFCN.

b) Maybe some fans idea... that the defense should be somewhat compromised for Aaron Rodgers stats. I would hope that's in 'no way the case'.

GO PACK GO !

If there was drama involved, I missed it. It was a relatively quiet announcement, then talk of it went away - quite in contrast to Flacco's show.

Too lazy to see if this link was posted already, but here are some early details of the deal
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/27/crazy-as-it-sounds-rodgers-took-less/

Pertinent information on what he took - with the 2 years remaining on his current contract, the adding on the 5 new years, he effectively has a 7yr/$130M deal - under the $20M/year number! Impressive indeed, and I stand by my statement that the deal is a good one.

He stands a very good chance of collecting every penny of the deal, there is no funny money at then end. The article says his cap number never goes over $21M in any year (nice!), contrast that to Flacco's $31M+ number in one of the years...which will have to be renegotiated into a signing bonus if they want to play with a 5 man OL, instead of only having money to put 4 linemen on the field! Ozzie Smith better draft well, I don't know how else the Ravens can compete during the life of Flacco's contract.

[mission]

And this cap number NEVER balloons like most of these fake mega deals... I think Flacco has a 31mil hit in 2015 or 16.
Great deal for all.

[Guiness]

And this cap number NEVER balloons like most of these fake mega deals... I think Flacco has a 31mil hit in 2015 or 16.
Great deal for all.

That's what I was saying - his cap number is under $21M/year for the whole deal, for seven years! It's a good deal now, and will be an absolute bargain in a few years. There isn't a team in the league that isn't salivating over that for a top QB.

[mission]

That's what I was saying - his cap number is under $21M/year for the whole deal, for seven years! It's a good deal now, and will be an absolute bargain in a few years. There isn't a team in the league that isn't salivating over that for a top QB.

And supposedly the cap is going up a lot with the new TV money in 2015. Will be an even bigger steal then. TT took shit for giving AR a new deal just a couple starts into his career, but this is what you get in return from a loyal guy. Pay him what he's worth, but don't murder the team. He knows we would have had to pay just about anything... didn't take advantage of that. In retrospect, Favre's 100m had more negative effect on the Packers then, than this one does now.

[gbgary]

so it sounds like we're in much better shape than anyone could have a imagined. whodathunkit? #ttgenius