Packers weighing contract options for Grant

[The Leaper]

The 4 year deal you propose helps Grant, but does nothing for us.

It does plenty for us.

A. It rewards a player for performance, which sends a message to the rest of the team.

B. It makes Grant happy and secure, which is better than him being a malcontent.

C. It sends a message to the league that the Packers aren't cheap skates, which will entice more free agents to look at Green Bay.

[The Leaper]

Giving him 4 times what we have to after 8 games is hardly an insult and signing him to a 5 year deal next year helps him a lot

No it doesn't. It doesn't really help him a damn bit.

Grant is a potential Pro Bowl caliber player who could command a $10M+ signing bonus in 2-3 years if he puts up great numbers.

Why the hell would he want to sign a lengthy 5 year deal right now that basically wipes out any chance he has to get a monster payday? He knows he is at a disadvantage right now, so he sure as hell isn't going to lock in long term.

[The Leaper]

The Packers have next year, the year after and then a restricted year where they can put a 1st and 3rd tender on him. No team will bid.

Grant's current situation is essentially a two year deal...because Green Bay would be almost forced to produce a big deal going into that third year if Grant proves himself. Otherwise, Grant would probably holdout and be a major pain in the ass...with good reason.

That is why you put him into a 4 year deal now...with a voidable 4th year if he performs. That gives us at least an extra year of Grant's services, allows Grant to have financial security, and doesn't bust our cap.

[RashanGary]

I'm sorry Leaper, you are freaking crazy. YOu just said gave a list of three things which was essentially one.

On top of that, Grant is one of the more unaccomplished players in the entire NFL. Not giving him money "right now" is absolutely not an insult. Not one bit. Christ, Wynn has 1/4th of Grants accomplishments. Should we redo his deal next year if he stays healthy.

Hell, you need to contact Pioli at the Foxborough and tell him his guys are underpaid. Tell him they are the best team in the league but they don't spend any more than anyone else. Remind him what a cheap ass he is and how it's blowing up in his face.



Any winner has guys over performing. If they weren't, they'd be losing and if we make it a point to deal mega cash out to every player who has 8 good games and three years left on his deal, we'll be right at the bottom of the pack with the NFL's worst.

[vince]

This year, one year deal @ 1 mil. (I'll up it just so he feels good making a million.



Next year sign a 5 year, 15 million dollar deal.



Really, the Packers could have him for three years at about $300,000 per year. That's 1 million after three years. With the deal I'm suggesting, he gets an additional 15 million for the fourth and fifth years. Really, it's a fair deal for him because he gets a lot more up front when he signs next year as opposed to risking the next three years of injury for peanuts. It's a good deal for us because it locks him up through his prime at a reasonable rate. Everyone wins.

If we just fork up a bunch of money now and don't even extend him longer than we have him, it's sort of silly. There has to be some compramise as in, we'll give you some early and you take that security in exchange for not getting max dollar in three years. Not "We'll give you a bunch more money for nothing". That's not compromise. That is stupid on the Packers part.

I think this is the right idea, but I'm not sure Grant signs for 5/15 if he rushes for 1300+ yards next year. That's pretty cheap for a top shelf runner. He can be had for 5 years, $15 mil this year no doubt, but I think the risk of the price going significantly higher after another season is significant.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

This year, one year deal @ 1 mil. (I'll up it just so he feels good making a million.



Next year sign a 5 year, 15 million dollar deal.



Really, the Packers could have him for three years at about $300,000 per year. That's 1 million after three years. With the deal I'm suggesting, he gets an additional 15 million for the fourth and fifth years. Really, it's a fair deal for him because he gets a lot more up front when he signs next year as opposed to risking the next three years of injury for peanuts. It's a good deal for us because it locks him up through his prime at a reasonable rate. Everyone wins.

If we just fork up a bunch of money now and don't even extend him longer than we have him, it's sort of silly. There has to be some compramise as in, we'll give you some early and you take that security in exchange for not getting max dollar in three years. Not "We'll give you a bunch more money for nothing". That's not compromise. That is stupid on the Packers part.

I think this is the right idea, but I'm not sure Grant signs for 5/15 if he rushes for 1300+ yards next year. That's pretty cheap. He can be had for 5 years, $15 mil this year perhaps, but I think the risk of the price going up after another season is significant.

Vince, thats what am scared of. What if he gets 1400+ this year? Good luck trying to sign him then. Give him a long term deal now thats pretty cheap and if he out plays that then upgrade it. The Eagles always do this. Once they see a player is good they sign him long term while he's still cheap.

[esoxx]

I wouldn't go crazy with Grant just yet. Too much leverage here for the Packers to just hand over the car keys.
We'll see what he's worth after next season.

[Bretsky]

I wouldn't go crazy with Grant just yet. Too much leverage here for the Packers to just hand over the car keys.
We'll see what he's worth after next season.

I too would like to see him for a half year or so before throwing serious money at him; I'd give him a nice raise for next year though and let him prove himself

[Partial]

I'd say you got a key part correct there JH - a four year deal only gives the team one more year, and they pay a LOT for it.

It gives them TWO more years.

YOu don't know what you are talkign about, Leaper.

You don't know what you're talking about. You want to screw over a player who out performed his contract. You want TT to be an asshole. Whatever happened to taking care of your own?

[RashanGary]

I think this is the right idea, but I'm not sure Grant signs for 5/15 if he rushes for 1300+ yards next year. That's pretty cheap for a top shelf runner. He can be had for 5 years, $15 mil this year no doubt, but I think the risk of the price going significantly higher after another season is significant.

If he wants to play hardball after this season, let him find out if he can stay healthy for two more full years and then send him packing at age 28 to get a big one if he makes it that long. On top of that, if he's as good as he thinks he is he'll fetch us a 3rd round compensitory on the way out.

The Packers have all of the cards right now. Every single card. There is no need to go jumping the gun right now. Wait one year, then sign him to a decent long term deal two years early. If he's not willing to take a discount two years early then just use up the best years of his career and let him go. It won't come to that though. His agent knows who has the cards now and he'll know who has the cards next year too.


It would be different if he racked up 2500 yards in three years but he racked up 900 yards in three years. The only way I'd consider locking up Grant right now is if it was 6 years with some up front and then another big bonus after two years. There is no need to panic with him right now. Worst case, we have him for ages 26,27 and 28, then he leaves as he's turning 29. Big deal, hardly the end of the world.

[RashanGary]

The Corey Williams situation is much stickier than this one. Williams has every bit of leverage (unless we franchise him). He'll probably be gone in his prime. That stinks.


Grant is going no where untill he's damn near the downside of his career. I'm all for hooking him up, but not after 8 games. That is just too soon with nothing to gain on our part.

[Jimx29]

If he continues to perform at or even close to this years performance at the mid way point of next year, then lock him up in a nice multi-tear contract.
The Pack has had very good results giving proven talent new contracts while still under contract.

[twoseven]

I wouldn't go crazy with Grant just yet. Too much leverage here for the Packers to just hand over the car keys.
We'll see what he's worth after next season.

I too would like to see him for a half year or so before throwing serious money at him; I'd give him a nice raise for next year though and let him prove himself

Absolutely. The guy got by as an unknown all year. That's over now, he'll be part of every opponents' defensive game plan next year AND MM has said he'd like to revert back to more of a power running game. Let Grant, if faced with those added challenges, prove he can do it for a full year before you start rewarding him with a longterm deal.

[Guiness]

I'm sorry Leaper, you are freaking crazy. YOu just said gave a list of three things which was essentially one.

I agree with JH, Leaper; all the benefits you laid out are intangeable; they'd be building goodwill, which is good, but not to the point of being stupid. Plus, they've already shown they're willing to reward performers by redoing DD and Kamp's deals, twice each.

However JH - dunno if this proves Leaper is crazy!

[Guiness]

I think this is the right idea, but I'm not sure Grant signs for 5/15 if he rushes for 1300+ yards next year. That's pretty cheap. He can be had for 5 years, $15 mil this year perhaps, but I think the risk of the price going up after another season is significant.

Vince, thats what am scared of. What if he gets 1400+ this year? Good luck trying to sign him then. Give him a long term deal now thats pretty cheap and if he out plays that then upgrade it. The Eagles always do this. Once they see a player is good they sign him long term while he's still cheap.

That's the quandry Vince - a 'what if' scenario. So you have to look at the other side...what if he runs for 800-900ish yards? Then you've got a guy being overpaid...unless you can get him to sign w/o a big signing bonus so that you can cut him later if he doesn't live up to it.

MD - I like that idea, and it's workable, partially because the Pack has shown a willingness to redo the deals - as I mentioned above with DD and Kamp. So something that gives him some money now, guarantees a decent salary...but he has to trust the Pack to give him the money if he deserves it.

Anyways, I see this discussion is a moot point now - there's another thread about him getting a deal that I'm anxious to read!