SkippyX Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 4 hours ago, Shanedorf said: Cap guru Andrew Brandt has talked about this often, trying to shed a little light on QB pay ( and overpay) He says: It doesn't matter if you pay your QB 12 % or 20% of the cap so long as he plays at that level. IF you pay him 15 % of cap and he plays like 9 % of the cap - that's where you run into big problems with the rest of your roster. Pay has to match performance. Rodgers performance in 2020 translates to a OTC valuation of $37 M, which is what his cap number is for 2021 $37M is a massive chunk of cap space - but if you get an MVP performance out of it - the value is there. https://overthecap.com/player/aaron-rodgers/1085/ That's a great way of explaining it. Try playing an auction league in Fantasy Football and deciding that no player is worth more than 20 on your cap. All the best players will be on other teams and you have to hope that you lucked out with your cheaper guesses. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwibrown Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 When you sign those contracts I'd trade a highly paid ver for picks. If the browns sign baker, I'd consider trading bitonio or tretter for some mod rounders to replace them and save 20 million over two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 32 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said: When you sign those contracts I'd trade a highly paid ver for picks. If the browns sign baker, I'd consider trading bitonio or tretter for some mod rounders to replace them and save 20 million over two years. Downgrading an offensive line in the first year of a massive QB contract is dangerous for a lot of reasons. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trentwannabe Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 I am very hopeful the Bills wait until at least part way through the 21 season to pay Allen. Bills have a lot of big decisions this off-season and not a whole lot of money (right now) to do it. They shouldn't rush to sign Allen to a mega deal because he isn't the type that will demand a new deal this off-season or hold out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drew39k Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 Players and teams should be more open to extending players earlier. Kind of like in baseball where teams frequently but out arbitration years in exchange for fa years. Re-up a rookie after year two to a new four year deal so the player isn't getting porked by playing on the rookie deal for two years and exchange they give up top end dollars for two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbuff Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 20 minutes ago, Trentwannabe said: I am very hopeful the Bills wait until at least part way through the 21 season to pay Allen. Bills have a lot of big decisions this off-season and not a whole lot of money (right now) to do it. They shouldn't rush to sign Allen to a mega deal because he isn't the type that will demand a new deal this off-season or hold out. Psh say this again when he wins us a Super Bowl in three weeks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrantikRam Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 7 hours ago, incognito_man said: trade for a boatload of picks, build a stupid good defense, and roll with a journey-man QB or a young, cheap guy to keep that window open. Like a cheap Goff is good enough to win a SB with, but an expensive Goff is not. They should have traded him. This right here. I wanted the Rams to be the first team to say 'no' to an apparent "franchise QB". The data is pretty clear - when you pay a QB, the supporting cast suffers. Brees had what seemed like an endless list of league worst defenses which led to a stream of non playoff seasons. Rodgers offensive talent went from the best to the near the worst over a slow painful period of time, which somehow saw the NFCs best QB for the past 10 years not once host an NFCCG and only make one Super Bowl. And those guys are two of the top five QBs ALL TIME. People say "this is the best QB we've had in years" but in the Rams case it's also (or was) the best supporting cast, best defense and best coach. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted January 19, 2021 Author Share Posted January 19, 2021 10 minutes ago, FrantikRam said: This right here. I wanted the Rams to be the first team to say 'no' to an apparent "franchise QB". The data is pretty clear - when you pay a QB, the supporting cast suffers. Brees had what seemed like an endless list of league worst defenses which led to a stream of non playoff seasons. Rodgers offensive talent went from the best to the near the worst over a slow painful period of time, which somehow saw the NFCs best QB for the past 10 years not once host an NFCCG and only make one Super Bowl. And those guys are two of the top five QBs ALL TIME. People say "this is the best QB we've had in years" but in the Rams case it's also (or was) the best supporting cast, best defense and best coach. This has LONG been my belief If you can swap a "top 10-15" QB for a pick that lands you a replacement rookie-contract QB, plus additional picks that land you a starter or two, plus saves you the cap that allows you to have 2-3 elite players at other positions - that always felt worth it And then Josh Allen happened to me, and I cannot for the life of me imagine going back to not having a QB I'm painfully worried about what happens when we have $30 million less to work with Ultimately, I think roster construction just has to be much more intentional, and you HAVE to have an elite GM who can do that properly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 8 hours ago, BigTrav said: People would probably consider me to have an extreme view on this, but I don't think there's many QBs at all worth that %. You mentioned Baker, who apparently everyone thinks is good now. Strange that when a competent coach who FINALLY played and crafted the offense around it's strengths, and cooked up some good plays to take advantage of their strengths - Mayfield is now considered key? Reality is, there's loads of QBs who could do what he does behind that OL, with that running game, with that coaching, with the receiving talent they do have. It's the same story for Jimmy, Goff, Cousins etc. Why you giving QBs like that the same money that Watsons, Rodgers etc get? If I visualize it, I'm thinking a QB like A-Rod is around 60-70% of why the offense is really good. Bakers, Cousins, Jimmys etc - like 30-50%? Something like that. Obviously not an exact science at all, but pay doesn't reflect the talent and what they do to elevate, IMO. On the other hand, they've got a QB who knows the system and can do his job and it's good to not have the problem of having no QB whatsoever. Like New England right now, hehe. See we say and think they're are loads bc of that shanny scheme yet they tried to solidify it with Jimmy G. Vikings Cousins, etc. I think Baker is definitely serviceable his weapons catching the ball are underwhelming just an opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 2 hours ago, SkippyX said: The problem is the phrasing of the question. The NFL collective bargaining agreement allows a draft and below market rates for 4 years for QBs. If you draft a good QB and don't have to pay him then good for you. The market rate for any good QB is around 30-35 million now. The market for borderline or question mark guys is around 20 million. The fair solution would be to just let every 5th year QB become a free agent or you have to actually pay them. Should Green Bay, New England, Indy, NY, and New Orleans have all moved on after the first expired contract of their SB QBs? I think only Brees on that list won a SB on the first contract and not after that. (it was his 2nd contract but 1st in NO) If the point of this whole too much money to the QB means no Super Bowls then you would have to conclude that Rodgers 2011-2019 was a failure. If that is the argument then the whole conversation is pointless because I want a Rodgers instead of throwing the dice for a deal on a rando QB. This is the classic Ryan Howard's (Phillies slugger) contract is outrageous! argument. His contract when he was MVP and winning playoff games was equally outrageous but that's how the CBA is structured. 11 years and 180 million was fine for Howard. People were just butthurt that most of the money came when he started to decline. They were fine with him getting 350k as league MVP though when he was worth 20m. Paying Wilson is expensive for the Seahawks. Its still a much better deal than cutting him so he signs with the 49ers. I think looking at it from purely a Super Bowl win or not is too restrictive. Yes, that is the ultimate goal, so not getting that is an issue. But If a team is paying 15% of their cap to the QB, that QB better be getting that team to the playoffs 75+% of the time on that type of cap hit. Once in the playoffs, then stringing together a few wins can get you there. Players like Stafford -- few playoff appearances Ryan -- 2 years of playoffs since inking his 1st big contract in 2013 Cousins -- 1 playoff appearance 3 years with MIN QB purgatory (top 10-20 QB) not elite enough to be able to lead a team that has to go cost conservative at other positions due to the QB contract, yet not awful enough to know you need to find a better option and able to win enough games that you are not picking high in the draft to get a QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 I think people over state the pursuit of teams trading for QBs who are due second contracts. I mean this would be the case if you're the bucs last year and your one player away. Not many teams can say that. And if you have a qb with that upside and he carries you to the playoffs you're not gonna get the devin whites, Vita Veas of the world, and wirfs. Worst thing to happen is to be the Seahawks they've been trying to upgrade that defense for 5 years but it's hard when Wilson is leading them to the playoffs annually. More than one way to look at it. Btw I can't believe Mariota is making 8.8 million this year and winston got 1 mill like I always thought winston was viewed more favorable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 4 minutes ago, squire12 said: If the point of this whole too much money to the QB means no Super Bowls then you would have to conclude that Rodgers 2011-2019 was a failure They kept mccarthy way too long I will never view aaron rodgers as a failure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, Tk3 said: This has LONG been my belief If you can swap a "top 10-15" QB for a pick that lands you a replacement rookie-contract QB, plus additional picks that land you a starter or two, plus saves you the cap that allows you to have 2-3 elite players at other positions - that always felt worth it And then Josh Allen happened to me, and I cannot for the life of me imagine going back to not having a QB I'm painfully worried about what happens when we have $30 million less to work with Ultimately, I think roster construction just has to be much more intentional, and you HAVE to have an elite GM who can do that properly It is tough for sure. Allen is showing signs of being able to lead a team into the playoffs, but is that a function of the rookie contract and having assets ($$) to use elsewhere? The trickle down effect of also being in the playoffs and having the significant drop in draft capital with the good/great QB makes drafting that much more critical. The NFL is built to be cyclical for teams to rise up and become contenders and then fall back down as the cost of players increases and the draft capital shifts away from them to replenish. It is rare to be able to keep a franchise in the playoffs for the duration of time that NE, GB, PIT, etc have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 1 minute ago, thebestever6 said: They kept mccarthy way too long I will never view aaron rodgers as a failure. why are you quoting something that I did not say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted January 19, 2021 Share Posted January 19, 2021 Just now, squire12 said: why are you quoting something that I did not say? You said you'd have to consider rodgers a failure misread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.