Elgton Jenkins Gets Paid (4 years, $68M)

[Packerraymond]

20 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

I'll end with this.  I do not disagree with many of your statements.  But the one about Linsley is about as poor of an example as you could have used.

We gave Linsley a top 10 AAV extension for his 2nd contract. So his point about Linsley is completely invalid anyway. If he wants to say you don't pay IOL on their 3rd deal, I can totally get on board with that, but the idea of letting Lang, Sutton, Linsley, Jenkins walk just because of where they play is ridiculous. Look at all those teams, they had Rodgers being paid, an EDGE like Matthews or Z, top corners like Woodson or Jaire, etc... These contracts have not been prohibitive by any means.

[Old Guy]

23 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

If you look at the long runs generated with Linsley versus without Linsley, it is staggering.

Now, in all fairness, I cannot take full credit for knowing this off the top of my head.  @AlexGreen#20 gave a delicious summary of it last year.  And it resonated with me.

You want to know why Jones has not sprung a long for a TD in a year and half?  Simply look at the center play.  (In no way did I say that Jones hasn't sprung a long one or a good one, I however added, for a TD)  

So again, let's not confuse Myers play at center with what Linsely did over time.  It is night and day different.  Myers may have a good game here and there, but Linsley was amazing and consistent.  Myers is still developing.

Linsley PFF.  2014.  76.7 (6th)  2015.  79.3 (3rd)  2016 76.4 (12th)  2017 67.7 (17th)  2018 78.6 (6th)  2019 73.9 (7th)  2020 86.4 (1st)  2021 85.7 (2nd)  2022 68.6 (12th)

Myers PFF.  2021 54.9 (33rd)  2022 61.4 (24th)

I'll end with this.  I do not disagree with many of your statements.  But the one about Linsley is about as poor of an example as you could have used.

The bolded part has zero to do with the center position. You are also greatly discounting us not having Bakh all year last year. An all-pro LT who was a beast in the run game is a major step back. We had, your boy, Newman at RG and he was just awful. 

You are trying to blame this on the center position, but that was hardly our biggest weakness on the line. Billy Turner struggled with injuries as well last year. 

Your argument is so flawed due to the drastic changes at other positions as well. 

[Old Guy]

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

We gave Linsley a top 10 AAV extension for his 2nd contract. So his point about Linsley is completely invalid anyway. If he wants to say you don't pay IOL on their 3rd deal, I can totally get on board with that, but the idea of letting Lang, Sutton, Linsley, Jenkins walk just because of where they play is ridiculous. Look at all those teams, they had Rodgers being paid, an EDGE like Matthews or Z, top corners like Woodson or Jaire, etc... These contracts have not been prohibitive by any means.

You, once again completely convoluted the statements to fit your agenda. I'm not going to fill you in on all the details but feel free to continue to jump in without any or all of the facts as you please. 

[vegas492]

17 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

The bolded part has zero to do with the center position. You are also greatly discounting us not having Bakh all year last year. An all-pro LT who was a beast in the run game is a major step back. We had, your boy, Newman at RG and he was just awful. 

You are trying to blame this on the center position, but that was hardly our biggest weakness on the line. Billy Turner struggled with injuries as well last year. 

Your argument is so flawed due to the drastic changes at other positions as well. 

No.  Your argument was flawed from the beginning.  It isn't like I'm picking at a loose string here, as your entire thought process is flawed concerning paying those guys.

The center position with Linsley was the reason those long runs were popped.  If you watched those plays a few times, you would have seen Linsley working to the second and third level many times.  That is the difference between a 15-20 yard run and one that pops for 60+ and a TD.  That one extra block.

Bakh has been healthy enough this year and playing at an elite level to know that the extra block was the center scraping and taking out guys on the second and third level.  And as I stated before...when you had Linsley, Jenkins and Bakh on the left side, it was gorgeous to watch.  Amazing. 

Sorry if you did not see this in in the past.

And...if I'm being fair here...Myers has it in him.  He just isn't there yet.  Linsley was there for many, many years.

You want to not pay non-premiums.  Fine.  That's your call.  It is also one that GB doesn't adhere to.  Rightly so.  

[Mazrimiv]

It's just weird to me that the gist of this entire debate seems to revolve around the idea that paying guys like Lang, Sitton, Linsley and now Jenkins a 2nd contract at market value is bad roster building strategy.  Those first three were excellent decisions by the GB FO, and I expect the Jenkins decision will be viewed the same way 5 years from now.  The idea that elite IOL aren't worth paying was obsolete 10 years ago.

[squire12]

On 12/24/2022 at 6:38 PM, squire12 said:

lets see how the contract is structured.

Were you against the Sitton, Lang, Linsley signings?

lets see how the contract is structured.

Were you against the Sitton, Lang, Linsley signings?

@Old Guy care to answer this?

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said:

It's just weird to me that the gist of this entire debate seems to revolve around the idea that paying guys like Lang, Sitton, Linsley and now Jenkins a 2nd contract at market value is bad roster building strategy.  Those first three were excellent decisions by the GB FO, and I expect the Jenkins decision will be viewed the same way 5 years from now.  The idea that elite IOL aren't worth paying was obsolete 10 years ago.

Can you find the last time GB paid an OL big money and it didn't work out?  Throw Bakh out the window, injury took him down and he seems to be back to elite form.

So...Turner?  He didn't get high end money, and I'd argue he was worth his deal.

I mean....top of my head, I can't remember the last time we paid a linemen and it was a bad investment.  Even when we've done lower end deals, they seem to work out.  Patrick, Taylor...etc.

The idea that you let a guy like Jenkins walk on his second deal is kindda ridiculous.  I get not wanting to pay high end money to anyone given out cap.  But you really gotta reward guys like Jenkins.  And I have little doubt that Ball can make that deal work.

[OneTwoSixFive]

There is another aspect of keeping guys playing at an elite level that isn't being talked about and that is the effect on the team if you consistently dump players when they have earned a big salary rise. Do that and you get seen as a cheapskate who is more interested in paying cheap contracts than rewarding a player for good play.

Do that a few times and it can poison your locker room........................and that IS a big deal, as often the difference between two teams is how hard each is playing to win.

[Gopackgonerd]

8 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

It's just weird to me that the gist of this entire debate seems to revolve around the idea that paying guys like Lang, Sitton, Linsley and now Jenkins a 2nd contract at market value is bad roster building strategy.  Those first three were excellent decisions by the GB FO, and I expect the Jenkins decision will be viewed the same way 5 years from now.  The idea that elite IOL aren't worth paying was obsolete 10 years ago.

You also have to account for how teams are putting their best pass rushers inside on 3rd downs/passing situations nowadays, and how disruptive DTs can be. Yeah you probably want to have bookend tackles priority one but you want to have a good line across the board as well. I just can't justify not being happy solidifying any part of your offensive line with a great player.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Gopackgonerd

[Cpdaly23]

Jenkins is going to play tackle for us again on this contract, maybe as soon as next season.  He was playing at an elite level at LT in 2021 prior to injury.  He was rated as the best potential 2023 free agent in the NFL by multiple sources.  Saying this is a bad signing is just an awful take.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Cpdaly23

[Mazrimiv]

Don't have all the details, but JSO is reporting the cap hits from the new Jenkins contract as

2022: 4.35M, 2023: 6.8M, 2024: 14.1M, 2025: 17.2M, 2026: 24.2M

I'd assume that final season will be a low dead cap hit with the guaranteed cash spread evenly from 2022-2026.

[Mazrimiv]

This is what JSO has for more detailed numbers

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2022/12/27/elgton-jenkins-2023-packers-salary-cap-hit-is-reasonable-6-8-million/69759888007/

Quote

The Packers reduced Jenkins’ remaining ’22 salary from $1,419,903 to $965,000 as part of the extension and then paid him the $24 million signing bonus. The bonus is pro-rated so that it counts $4.8 million each year.

The rest of the contract looks like this:

2023: $1.1 million base salary, $600,000 maximum in per-game roster bonus and $500,000 in a workout bonus. Cap number is $6.8 million

2024: $3.5 million base salary, $5.1 million roster bonus paid on third day of the league year, $600,000 maximum in per-game roster bonus and $500,000 in a workout bonus. Cap number is $14.1 million

2025: $11.7 million base salary, $600,000 maximum in per-game roster bonus and $500,000 in a workout bonus. Cap number is $17.2 million.

2026: $18.5 million base salary, $1 million maximum in per-game roster bonus and $500,000 in a workout bonus. Cap number is $24.2 million.

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Mazrimiv

[vegas492]

It's hard to be mad about that contract for him, right?  

[Mazrimiv]

There was never a reason to be mad about the contract.  Once the initial guarantees were set at 24M, this always seemed to be more or less what the structure was likely to be. 

[CWood21]

3 hours ago, vegas492 said:

It's hard to be mad about that contract for him, right?  

Not at all.  In fact, I'd argue this deal is pretty heavily slanted towards Green Bay all things considered.  Assuming the contract that Ken Ingalls' posted is even remotely close, the Packers could get out of this after 2 years, $30.2M if things went incredibly sour.  This deal probably gets him through 2025 at the very least, but 2026 is meant to get the Packers back to the table for either an extension or release.