ChaRisMa Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 1 minute ago, squire12 said: Correct. GB can't really cut Rodgers given the cap implications. So if Rodgers wants to go to a singular specific team....say SF, GB needs to keep him or trade him there. And what is the trade compensation/ trade value in that scenario? San Francisco representatives can’t talk to him until we allow them to—meaning we get to set the price before Rodgers talks to anyone with real power in their organization directly—something Rodgers will want to do to ensure his comfort in the situation or to talk contract. Brian Gutekunst also gets a TON of public support to hold onto Rodgers for an aggressive payload. San Fran would be risking relationships with their current QB room, and playing with public support themselves. Compensation has to also reflect the cap left behind. Davante. History seems kind of random in that situation though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 22 minutes ago, squire12 said: What happens is Rodgers says he is playing for GB and if GB trades him he would then retire? What's his trade value? Rodgers could say he is playing 1 last season in 2023. What's his trade value then? Maybe some sort of double conditional pick trade scenario? Just kind talking out loud here. Most likely it'd kill the trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgwingman Posted February 19, 2023 Author Share Posted February 19, 2023 5 minutes ago, OzPackfan said: My understanding is that whilst whatever he gets paid this year is fully guaranteed, the option bonus isn't due to be paid until August so at any point between now and then, He and the Packers can redo the contract and remove that option bonus and/or move it around into some other form. Its no different per say to a 5th year option which is also fully guaranteed. OK so theoretically, you could do something like exercise the $60M option, which divides evenly over the last 4 years of the contract ($15M/year). You could add on void years to lower the $15, but $15M is so low what would be the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 4 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: San Francisco representatives can’t talk to him until we allow them to—meaning we get to set the price before Rodgers talks to anyone with real power in their organization directly—something Rodgers will want to do to ensure his comfort in the situation or to talk contract. Sure....SF and GB can agree to a trade package. But supposedly Saints and Raiders had something worked out for Carr....how did that end up once Carr got to discuss with Saints. Once Rodgers informs a team how long he'd be willing to consider playing...2023 only in this hypothetical...does the trade terms get reworked by the teams? 4 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: Brian Gutekunst also gets a TON of public support to hold onto Rodgers for an aggressive payload. San Fran would be risking relationships with their current QB room, and playing with public support themselves. Compensation has to also reflect the cap left behind. Davante. History seems kind of random in that situation though. Compensation can reflect dead cap, but that was created by GB, so not sure why SF needs to factor that into their trade offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgwingman Posted February 19, 2023 Author Share Posted February 19, 2023 6 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Maybe some sort of double conditional pick trade scenario? Just kind talking out loud here. Most likely it'd kill the trade. Yeah I guess if you traded him to a team and he retires out of protest, neither team would be on the hook for the money. He could show up to practice every day and protest, no team would cut him and take the dead cap it. So in the end, it still behooves everyone to be in agreement about the option selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzPackfan Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, pgwingman said: OK so theoretically, you could do something like exercise the $60M option, which divides evenly over the last 4 years of the contract ($15M/year). You could add on void years to lower the $15, but $15M is so low what would be the point. As it currently stands that will already happen once the bonus is paid. My belief is that if he decides to play on, whichever team he is on will re-do the contract and remove the option bonus before it is due to be paid as he wont be getting paid that much by any team in the league. His compensation for the year will be somewhere in the 40-45m range unless he decides to be generous and agrees to play for much less to give his team a better chance of competing for the SB Edited February 19, 2023 by OzPackfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgwingman Posted February 19, 2023 Author Share Posted February 19, 2023 1 minute ago, OzPackfan said: As it currently stands that will already happen once the bonus is paid. My belief is that if he decides to play on then whickever team he is on will re-do the contract and remove the option bonus before it is due to be paid as he wont be getting paid that much by any team in the league. His compensation for the year will be somewhere in the 40-45m range unless he decides to be generous and agrees to play for much less to give his team a better chance of competing for the SB Could you remove an option that's fully guaranteed? I would assume the NFLPA would sue the NFL for violating a guaranteed contract. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 2 minutes ago, OzPackfan said: As it currently stands that will already happen once the bonus is paid. My belief is that if he decides to play on, whichever team he is on will re-do the contract and remove the option bonus before it is due to be paid as he wont be getting paid that much by any team in the league. Why is Rodgers removing the option bonus? 2 minutes ago, OzPackfan said: His compensation for the year will be somewhere in the 40-45m range unless he decides to be generous and agrees to play for much less to give his team a better chance of competing for the SB Why is Rodgers now taking a payout? These things seem unprecedented for Rodgers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzPackfan Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 1 minute ago, pgwingman said: Could you remove an option that's fully guaranteed? I would assume the NFLPA would sue the NFL for violating a guaranteed contract. If the player and team agree to it then its effectively like a new contract superseding the current one and any pro-rated money will carry forward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgwingman Posted February 19, 2023 Author Share Posted February 19, 2023 2 minutes ago, OzPackfan said: If the player and team agree to it then its effectively like a new contract superseding the current one and any pro-rated money will carry forward Yeah but what's in it for Rodgers? Taking a pay cut from money he's guaranteed? The only time players take pay cuts is when teams threaten to release them. Rodgers money is guaranteed, so releasing him wouldn't change anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 5 minutes ago, OzPackfan said: If the player and team agree to it then its effectively like a new contract superseding the current one and any pro-rated money will carry forward You're not taking player incentive to account. Rodgers has never turned a dime down before. Suddenly he wants to give back $10-15m that he's due to earn without doing anything? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzPackfan Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, squire12 said: Why is Rodgers removing the option bonus? Why is Rodgers now taking a payout? These things seem unprecedented for Rodgers A - He knows he isn't getting paid 60m this year and already alluded to the fact a restructure will happen if he decides to come back this year. B - He may not be generous enough to take a pay cut but last year he was paid 42m in cash and that was coming off 2 MVP seasons. It's not unexpected that he will get paid the same or maybe slightly less this year. Edited February 19, 2023 by OzPackfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 1 hour ago, ChaRisMa said: When you talk about someone else and it becomes public later on, you’ve involved them at that point. I understand that he wasn’t physically present for the conversation. It’s still about him. The moment it’s reported into the public sphere he’s definitely involved, right? No. Rodgers' comment on what Gute said to a colleague is totally irrelevant. He wasn't there. It doesn't matter if the exchange was about him or not. Rodgers is welcome to give an interview with his reaction to the story. But beyond that, he doesn't have to be involved unless he wants to be. There's absolutely zero reason a reporter would need to involve Rodgers or get his comment before running the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 16 minutes ago, squire12 said: Sure....SF and GB can agree to a trade package. But supposedly Saints and Raiders had something worked out for Carr....how did that end up once Carr got to discuss with Saints. Once Rodgers informs a team how long he'd be willing to consider playing...2023 only in this hypothetical...does the trade terms get reworked by the teams? Compensation can reflect dead cap, but that was created by GB, so not sure why SF needs to factor that into their trade offer. Rodgers doesn’t have a no trade clause like Carr did. But, I’m working from the angle of: Rodgers demands a trade to a particular team. Our leverage is that he’s under contract with us, and no one else can talk to him unless we agree to allow him to. Agree his indecision makes him less valuable on the trade market. The acceleration of that large of a cap hit has never been done before that I know of. Can see your point that San Fran probably doesn’t cave to the notion that’s their fault or problem in negotiations. But it is going unwillingly into salary cap hell simultaneously from our point of view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 2 minutes ago, incognito_man said: No. Rodgers' comment on what Gute said to a colleague is totally irrelevant. He wasn't there. It doesn't matter if the exchange was about him or not. Rodgers is welcome to give an interview with his reaction to the story. But beyond that, he doesn't have to be involved unless he wants to be. There's absolutely zero reason a reporter would need to involve Rodgers or get his comment before running the story. You originally responded today to me asking about the questionable timing of Silverstein releasing his info when he knows Rodgers can’t respond. You don’t find that at all suspicious that Silverstein and McGinn wait until Rodgers can’t respond before they release their clickbait? 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.