Jump to content

Report: Rodgers Wants Out of Green Bay


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

 

"Some friends of a friend played poker with Aaron Rodgers and John Elway at a golf course" is the funniest "made up story told by a dumb guy" lie I've heard in a long time lol. This is like one of those stories your coworker tells you that is an obvious lie but you're too polite and also have to keep cordially working with them, so you just say something like "wow that's crazy" 

Edited by Isherwood
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ifeelasleep said:

Contracts are heavily tilted to the franchise, players are waking up to that and that will change at some point not too far in the future. More chances to get injured, hundreds of cheap workers coming in every year to take your spot, contracts with a bunch of outs built in, job security is hard to come by in the NFL.
 

I tend to err on the side of labour with these issues, but I'd love to see the fans here if GB was stuck with all sorts of crappy players finishing out the string on expensive contracts (and if this were how the NFL worked, it isn't as though GB would be mismanaged, it would be how most teams look....some FAR WORSE than others, GB would probably be near the better end of things). It would be "let's march on Lambeau with pitchforks, just like we didn't the last several times we were so angry!" 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ifeelasleep said:

except its about prediction not just production, in your high pressure boiler room companies having an out when you approach 30 would be grounds for a lawsuit. getting to the nfl is an achievement that takes a lifetime, careers are cut short and contracts are not even guaranteed, thats seems little to ask for a league that dwarfs all the others in revenue, ratings, and bombast. I understand theres a higher number of rostered players but the setup seems non sustainable for the players.

Rightly or not the players can see what happens in other sports, and they might feel they are better athletes or bigger stars in a bigger sport. 
 

Why do people ignore that the CBA exists? The entire purpose of a CBA is that it grants an exemption to the pesky unemployment laws that govern most businesses. It invalidates any comparison to the real world.

The players could negotiate guaranteed contracts in the next CBA, but in order to get it, they would likely have to compromise on the amount of revenue. Given the choice between guaranteed contracts and 45% of revenue vs no guaranteed contracts and 50% of revenue, the players have chosen 50% every time. That's a choice the players make. They shouldn't be pitied for making that choice. If Rodgers hates that, he should take it up with JC Tretter. 

If Rodgers wanted a fully guaranteed contact, he could have signed one. Kirk Cousins did it. The Packers would have offered it. But Rodgers wanted to make more money and he wanted to make it up front. This thing athletes do where they intentionally structure a 5 year contract so that a disproportionate amount of money pays out in years 1-3, and then they complain in year 4 that they're underpaid, is complete nonsense. 

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Why do people ignore that the CBA exists? The entire purpose of a CBA is that it grants an exemption to the pesky unemployment laws that govern most businesses. It invalidates any comparison to the real world.

The players could negotiate guaranteed contracts in the next CBA, but in order to get it, they would likely have to compromise on the amount of revenue. Given the choice between guaranteed contracts and 45% of revenue vs no guaranteed contracts and 50% of revenue, the players have chosen 50% every time. That's a choice the players make. They shouldn't be pitied for making that choice. If Rodgers hates that, he should take it up with JC Tretter. 

If Rodgers wanted a fully guaranteed contact, he could have signed one. Kirk Cousins did it. The Packers would have offered it. But Rodgers wanted to make more money and he wanted to make it up front. This thing athletes do where they intentionally structure a 5 year contract so that a disproportionate amount of money pays out in years 1-3, and then they complain in year 4 that they're underpaid, is complete nonsense. 

@SSG

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Why do people ignore that the CBA exists? The entire purpose of a CBA is that it grants an exemption to the pesky unemployment laws that govern most businesses. It invalidates any comparison to the real world.

The players could negotiate guaranteed contracts in the next CBA, but in order to get it, they would likely have to compromise on the amount of revenue. Given the choice between guaranteed contracts and 45% of revenue vs no guaranteed contracts and 50% of revenue, the players have chosen 50% every time. That's a choice the players make. They shouldn't be pitied for making that choice. If Rodgers hates that, he should take it up with JC Tretter. 

If Rodgers wanted a fully guaranteed contact, he could have signed one. Kirk Cousins did it. The Packers would have offered it. But Rodgers wanted to make more money and he wanted to make it up front. This thing athletes do where they intentionally structure a 5 year contract so that a disproportionate amount of money pays out in years 1-3, and then they complain in year 4 that they're underpaid, is complete nonsense. 

But, it's Rodgers.  Some have a poster of him above their be, how will they go on?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SSG said:

Not arguing with you about contracts again.  NFL teams cut contracts short and demand players to take massive paycuts every single year.  When teams stop treating contracts like toilet paper I'll get angry at a player for wanting to renegotiate a deal early.


I doubt that Preston Smith thought he was going to have to look for a new spot 2 years into a 4 year deal but that is exactly what he was looking at if he didn't agree to a massive team friendly pay cut.  Don't give me this bull**** about integrity when you are so eager to act like the above transaction didn't occur. 

Agree with this somewhat.  That being said, huge upfront money isn't ever turned down and never a complaint about that from a player.  Honor the frickin contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ifeelasleep said:

Contracts are heavily tilted to the franchise, players are waking up to that and that will change at some point not too far in the future. More chances to get injured, hundreds of cheap workers coming in every year to take your spot, contracts with a bunch of outs built in, job security is hard to come by in the NFL.

theres still 3 years left on rodgers contract, thats why it came out of nowhere for most.

That's what the NFLPA is for ... not the franchise's problem.  Negotiate better and don't whine about it when it doesn't work out like you wanted.  Drafted players in most cases make more than any of us would ever dream about so I'm not shedding a tear for any of them.  Many folks get injured on their job and it aint football.  LOL.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last report/article I read was proposing Chubb,Lock,Risner, 3 1sts and a 2nd....

Done Deal, sign me up... try to drop Lock for Sutton, Fant or Surtain, but take it either way...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 3 1s, I'd prefer a different group of players. Chubb is nice but already in year 4 due 12 mil on his 5th year tender next year. Reisner is great but the I feel there is enough talent on the OL that it's not needed. I'd rather Either Jeudy or Fant (no way they'd do both, and if I could talk them into it Surtain, and offer to send them King. As far as a QB it makes sense for them to throw one in, I don't think it would change the rest of the package if Lock or Bridgewater are included or not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, ifeelasleep said:

other sports get bonuses, incentives based on performance and awards, thats why it favors the teams.

Apples and oranges. Teams in other sports have much less risk that an injury greatly affects their signee. NFL also has much greater roster sizes, so it helps many more players achieve wealth. For instance you have to be in the top ~510 basketball players in the world to make it on an NBA roster. But only top ~1696 football players for NFL roster. So I guess you have to account for the next-best 1186 basketball players that didn’t make the cut and are making $0 from the NBA. And since so many more players can cycle through the NFL, so many more football players receive a retirement pension. 

Season length is also completely different. MLB teams get 162 games annually out of each of their players. 82 for NBA. 56 NHL. NFL teams only get 16 games from their players. 

Edited by TransientTexan
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2021 at 11:00 PM, NFLGURU said:

For me, the X factor is if Jordan Love can play.  It changes a lot in what you ask for.  

According to Silverstein the Packers would be asking for a QB in return.  

Gotta wonder what the Packers think of Love and if they are looking for a bridge QB is there a big difference in Bortles and Drew Lock??

If the Packers think Love can play, I think you have to consider that trade maybe with a tweak or two after jun 1.

Keep in mind the chances of the Packers getting to a SB with all this turmoil going on, Rodgers taking up 20% of the cap, (highest SB winning QB was 14% of the cap), and Brady and TB in the way isn't very good.  

I think it has more to do with them wanting to bring Love around on their schedule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...