Who Will Aaron Rodgers Play For In 2023 (Or Will He Play)?

[RashanGary]

i think thats still up for debate as to whether its legal or not to take back signing bonuses

i think it ends up going to the courts to decide that, and i'm not sure we've ever gotten a decision

Pretty sure if a guy retires, the signing bonus gets paid back proportionally to how many years he played of it. That’s why the cap hit is less if he retires than is cut. And even if they keep the money legally, for cap purposes it doesn’t count.

[red]

Pretty sure if a guy retires, the signing bonus gets paid back proportionally to how many years he played of it. That’s why the cap hit is less if he retires than is cut. And even if they keep the money legally, for cap purposes it doesn’t count.

oh, for cap purposes. ok

i thought you were talking about the real money

[Jaire]

Pretty sure if a guy retires, the signing bonus gets paid back proportionally to how many years he played of it. That’s why the cap hit is less if he retires than is cut. And even if they keep the money legally, for cap purposes it doesn’t count.

No. If AR retires or is traded, GB doesn't pay him any more nor do they get a dime back. It's done. But, if it's before June 1, all the money paid (and scheduled to hit against cap in years ahead) counts against this year instead. The difference is 40 million instead of 31 presently. After June 1, more money would count against 2024 cap.

If he stays this year or is cut, GB owes him 60 million. That's money he has not been paid at all. That's why the Jets are gonna at least ask GB to pay some of his salary.

The only significance of June 1 is that some money counts against next year's cap. It really doesn't matter since books are easily cooked.

[texaspackerbacker]

And some of ya'all actually think the Packers would be that ALL WORLD STUPID to basically pay the Jets to take Rodgers? Sheeeeesh. Does it not even occur to ya'all that the despicable shitheads of the media, mostly New York through and through, are conjuring up this idiocy that ya'all are swallowing?

[RashanGary]

And some of ya'all actually think the Packers would be that ALL WORLD STUPID to basically pay the Jets to take Rodgers? Sheeeeesh. Does it not even occur to ya'all that the despicable shitheads of the media, mostly New York through and through, are conjuring up this idiocy that ya'all are swallowing?

Packers aren’t taking the salary. I agree. And I’d bet on it. But they do have to eat the 40 that’s already been paid and the Jets get a very reasonable deal (36 per year) the way it is right now. For whoever he’s traded to (most likely Jets), the contract is a bonus, not a hinderance. It’s less per year than Daniel Jones. Any money they give Rodgers (60M bonus in year 1) is spread over the rest of the contract. If he retires, some of it won’t count against the cap.

[Fritz]

That's factually incorrect. If Rodgers retires,it's a 40 mil cap hit; same if he's traded. June 1st vs pre June 1st just spreads the hit out. The money is already paid. It's just cap hit and only 9 million more than what already counts against the cap.

NOW, the Jets may want to lower the 60 million cash he makes if he joins the Jets -- same as what Rodgers gets if he's cut by GB (now or after June 1). That's why the deal was so bad. You can spread it out, but 60 million is 60 million. Rodgers imo holds ALL the cards. That's why you hear Murphy saying saying he wants AR to go to the Jets (or retire). There is nothing GB can do about it as far as I can tell.

That’s factually incorrect, that bit I posted from that Jets site?

Well those goddamn shit-spewing media pukes.

Thank you for explaining how it actually works. I know little about how the cap actually works, so sometimes I need to be educated.

It sounds like no matter what, the Packers are going to be carrying loads of dead cap money for at least the next couple of years. Guter took all that cap space Ted carefully nurtured over the years, spent like a drunken sailor, and for his efforts got disappointing playoff losses after three good regular seasons.

[run pMc]

Not fully clear on the 2024 comp, OTC says "If Rodgers is on the roster on the 5th day of the 2024 waiver period his salary for the year and a $47 million option bonus will be fully guaranteed. " so I think if he plays two years it's cheaper for the NYJ but I'm not clear on by how much. It looks like his cap number drops that year. I don't know if they can redo his contract, he's going to want that money and if he's year-to-year on play vs. retirement that makes it tough. Getting a 2 year commitment from him could be a big part of any deal.

I'm sure the Jets asked GB to pay part of the money when they talked trade compensation, but unless they throw in something like a higher/additional pick or take Savage off the books I don't see that happening.

[Jaire]

That’s factually incorrect, that bit I posted from that Jets site?

Well those goddamn shit-spewing media pukes.

Thank you for explaining how it actually works. I know little about how the cap actually works, so sometimes I need to be educated.

It sounds like no matter what, the Packers are going to be carrying loads of dead cap money for at least the next couple of years. Guter took all that cap space Ted carefully nurtured over the years, spent like a drunken sailor, and for his efforts got disappointing playoff losses after three good regular seasons.

No. It's not bad at all if we trade this year. It'll be tight in 2023, but then I don't see any problems.

[RashanGary]

Rodgers might restructure for the next team, but he won’t give up guarantees. I was confused by the contract when I first saw some of the details. But now I see it was written that way to give him guarantees and make this trade possible.

[Fritz]

Myself, I'd prefer that they suck it up this year and eat as much dead cap money as they can and still field a team, then get to work next year with a stronger cap picture and probably some higher-end picks, and launch the Love Era with some resources at the team's disposal. Sure, this coming season will be tough. But it's going to be a learning curve for your QB anyway, so why not?

[RashanGary]

Myself, I'd prefer that they suck it up this year and eat as much dead cap money as they can and still field a team, then get to work next year with a stronger cap picture and probably some higher-end picks, and launch the Love Era with some resources at the team's disposal. Sure, this coming season will be tough. But it's going to be a learning curve for your QB anyway, so why not?

I agree. Just keep the main pieces and hope to have a couple good drafts. Get the cap in better shape so if we end up in a situation where we’re close with love we have the option to kick the can down the road again and take a couple shots. We’re not winning the sb with love in his first year.

[RashanGary]

I’d like to keep Bakh. Give Love a good line and make his development a little easier in year 1. A bad line would make it harder for him to get in a groove.

[Fritz]

I’d like to keep Bakh. Give Love a good line and make his development a little easier in year 1. A bad line would make it harder for him to get in a groove.

As I have said before, I know little about how the cap actually works in any level of detail, so I don't know if a recent article I read about Bakh's restructure is true. It was I think an ACME article, or it linked through ACME. The gist of it was that Bakh's restructure seems to assure that he will have to remain with the Packers, that the restructure made it well-nigh impossible to trade him.

But I don't know enough about how the cap really works to know if that's true.

I'm fine with keeping him, just fine. That way they could draft his successor and give him a year to sit and learn, unless Bakh, gets . . . you know, not able to play.

[jklowan]

If they traded Bak with the restructure it would now negatively effect the cap, meaning the hit is higher this year if they trade him.

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers

[texaspackerbacker]

Another one of those contracts that's inexplicable if they intend to get rid of Rodgers hahahaha. I say again, they're keeping Bakhtiari because Rodgers wants them to keep Bakhtiari, and the Packers are keeping Rodgers.

Ya'all wonder why things happen from your flawed point of view - when it would make perfect sense if you didn't have that flawed point of view.