Using the Cap to Max Advantage

[texaspackerbacker]

I previously talked about manipulating the cap, and some whiner didn't like that terminology. So I will just say and emphasize, what we need to do is get as close to the edge as possible. We really ought to be able to keep everybody worth keeping.

Specifically, what I would like to see is for Gutekunst and La Fleur soon after the season to get all the players who either are free agents to be or potential cap casualties or candidates for restructuring together in one room - Let 'em bring their agents too if they want. Lay out the facts - how big the total pot of money is with the decreasing cap, and hash it all out/divide what is available with fair and equal sacrificing for the good of the team and heavily backloaded contracts.

The shit causing the cap decrease should be over by next season and beyond, and you can bet that future increases will not only be what they have been in the past, but larger to make up for this lost season.

With the type and quality of players the Packers have and the natural desire to keep what we have and keep on winning if it's presented right.

[sharpe1027]

Some out if the box thinking, but by pitting players financial interests against each other in such a direct manner...what could go wrong?

[Fritz]

What if Gute has this vision where he lets the Pack's FA's walk and signs guys from elsewhere? You okay there?

[Fritz]

Typical management move - the pie is only so big, etc. Then the execs get ginormous raises for themselves.

[run pMc]

Some out if the box thinking, but by pitting players financial interests against each other in such a direct manner...what could go wrong?

LOL true. There are downsides to that approach.

[KYPack]

This isn't a good idea or a bad idea. The players have a right to have representation participate in the negotiation of their deals.

"Let 'em bring their agents too if they want"?

They would all have their agents inform the team that their clients would not take part in a cluster/taffy pull like this. This situation is impossible under the current CBA.

it's a pipe dream that will never happen.

[texaspackerbacker]

What if Gute has this vision where he lets the Pack's FA's walk and signs guys from elsewhere? You okay there?

It depends on who goes and who comes - obviously. I've said previously, I think we could use Zakarius and Preston's $20 and 9 million cap money to sign better people. Do that and heavily backload the contracts, and we might be a lot better off. And an upgrade from Kevin King wouldn't be out of the question also.

[texaspackerbacker]

This isn't a good idea or a bad idea. The players have a right to have representation participate in the negotiation of their deals.

"Let 'em bring their agents too if they want"?

They would all have their agents inform the team that their clients would not take part in a cluster/taffy pull like this. This situation is impossible under the current CBA.

it's a pipe dream that will never happen.

I don't think it's naive to think of players putting winning and long term reward (big back loaded contracts) over short term money. And if somebody doesn't like it, you can always cut their ass. I think, though, Packer players more than most teams would be open to this sort of thing.

[run pMc]

Pretty sure this is why there's a player's union and a CBA. Negotiating with everyone at once would be like negotiating with a union -- the players (and agents) would be incentivized to collectively band together and hold out for a pay increase. Letting them all go would hurt your roster and seriously hamper your team's ability to bring in other free agents or future negotiations once news of this tactic hit social media. I imagine Russ Ball/Mark Murphy would be the laughingstock of the league.

You run into all the personal details going into negotiating a new contract -- each of these players will have families, individual performance discussions, etc., that are very personal and possibly (e.g., if specific injury/health details are involved) required by law to be held privately.

It's a pretty simplistic and brutish way to attempt to negotiate a contract; sounds like something Cincinnati might have tried in the 90's.

[texaspackerbacker]

A lot of people in general don't like what unions do for them. That is particularly true with something like the NFL where there is a huge difference in talent and job skill from one player to the next. And this, of course, is a situation that has never happened before and hopefully will never happen again. Teams will cut overpaid players if necessary either to be competitive or just to field a full team. It seems to me that there is more camaraderie among Packer players than most teams, and this just might work. Otherwise, they end up cutting good players and making the chances of winning worse. Nobody wants that. No matter what, there's gonna be a lot of restructuring. Why not make it a group effort? No way the whole group would ever get cut, but a few key pieces certainly might - as I mentioned, the Smiths for example.

[sharpe1027]

I think they make this type of argument without getting everyone in the room. Most player's that are willing to look at the bigger picture probably don't need to be put in a room to understand.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Huge back loaded contracts? Players know they very likely won't see that money. That means big base salaries, which makes that player is very likely to get cut. This has happened for a long time in the NFL. That's why players want the big signing bonuses and guaranteed money.

[texaspackerbacker]

That may be the way a lot of fans think, but I suspect most players see themselves as going on and being good a helluva lot longer than fans do. Big signing bonuses on the other hand, are not inconsistent with beating the cap, given the way bonuses are treated in the cap. Give a player a $15 million bonus on a five year contract and a $1 million salary, and he counts just $4 million against the cap instead of a lot more - and it's player friendly too.

[Cheesehead Craig]

That may be the way a lot of fans think, but I suspect most players see themselves as going on and being good a helluva lot longer than fans do. Big signing bonuses on the other hand, are not inconsistent with beating the cap, given the way bonuses are treated in the cap. Give a player a $15 million bonus on a five year contract and a $1 million salary, and he counts just $4 million against the cap instead of a lot more - and it's player friendly too.

Lol. Keep dreaming. Those contacts don't happen.

It isn't fans believing players with huge base salaries get cut at the and of their contract, that's facts.

[texaspackerbacker]

The point is keeping the heart of the team NEXT SEASON. Bonuses grease the wheels for that to happen.

Sure, some players don't justify the back end of a contract, but if they get a cap-friendly big contract with a sizable bonus, it's win/win for the player/team.

And the cap and future restructuring should more than accommodate the back end of those big contracts if a few/some/most of those players do justify sticking to the end of the contract.