Random Packer News & Notes

[OneTwoSixFive]

I never begrudged a player trying to get the best salary he can (though I was close to it with the Dak Prescott holdout and his current contract).

Fans usually want high paid guys to take less money, but why should they take less than market value ? 

Sure it is a great deal of money, but that is because the number of people available who can do what he does, is almost nil.

Edited February 25, 2022 by OneTwoSixFive

[Old Guy]

14 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I never begrudged a player trying to get the best salary he can (though I was close to it with the Dak Prescott holdout and his current contract).

Fans usually want high paid guys to take less money, but why should they take less than market value ? 

Sure it is a great deal of money, but that is because the number of people available who can do what he does, is almost nil.

I think you miss the point entirely. Rodgers knows we have cap issues. Rodgers has said, 'it won't be about the money!' "Money won't be the issue!" 

That was complete bull**** if this report is true. 

[Leader]

4 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

I think you miss the point entirely. Rodgers knows we have cap issues. Rodgers has said, 'it won't be about the money!' "Money won't be the issue!" 

That was complete bull**** if this report is true. 

Consider that he might be using the salary level as a means of leaving.

[NFLGURU]

47 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

 

The answer is NO, he hasn't and based on the 50 million a year he's not taking less for Adams or any of his other teammates. 

 

I'm glad you were there during all those negotiations.  

[squire12]

wasn't Campbell in GB this last week?   wonder what that was about and if a contract is coming or stalled

[NFLGURU]

55 minutes ago, squire12 said:

wasn't Campbell in GB this last week?   wonder what that was about and if a contract is coming or stalled

I think that was about getting an idea of what he's looking for. Gute expressed confidence in getting something done after their meetings so maybe they are close??.  I think he's higher on their list than some  people think.  We'll see how it plays out.

[squire12]

10 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

I think that was about getting an idea of what he's looking for. Gute expressed confidence in getting something done after their meetings so maybe they are close??.  I think he's higher on their list than some  people think.  We'll see how it plays out.

yeah, I think GB wants Campbell back.  Just going to be interesting in how the money works and how GB wants to structure things.  

[Sandy]

27 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

I think that was about getting an idea of what he's looking for. Gute expressed confidence in getting something done after their meetings so maybe they are close??.  I think he's higher on their list than some  people think.  We'll see how it plays out.

He seems to be at the top of the list once they clear cap to fit him in and know how the Rodgers/Adams situation plays out. I think they're prepared to re-sign him regardless of that outcome.

[CWood21]

6 hours ago, Old Guy said:

You think Adams is taking that deal when so much of his money is tied to playing each game. LOL, his agent would never touch that deal. Every NFL player is one play away from their career being over. He's only guaranteed 45 million. He's going to want somewhere closer to 75 million guaranteed, like salary in year 2 and 3. 

I mean, I don't think the deal is something that Davante would sign, but I don't think it's that horrendous either.  If they were to release Adams after Y1, they'd incur $36M in dead cap which effectively guarantees he's on the roster since they'd eat an additional $18M in dead cap beyond his cap hit already.  That effectively puts his 2024 season as a push with $27M in dead cap.  You can either pay him $28M to play or you can have $27M in dead cap for him to not play.  I think that Y1 cap hit needs to come up and that Y4 cap hit needs to come down.

[CWood21]

9 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

50 mil per .. why pay that?  That would be stupid.

If he wants $50M/year, he can go play in Siberia for all that I care.

[CWood21]

8 hours ago, packfanfb said:

In general or just for the Packers? Because some team for sure is going to pay him. In fact, teams are going to get in line to do it. 

I'll take my boatload of picks and let some other team hand him a $50M+/year contract.

[Toddfather]

[OzPackfan]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

I mean, I don't think the deal is something that Davante would sign, but I don't think it's that horrendous either.  If they were to release Adams after Y1, they'd incur $36M in dead cap which effectively guarantees he's on the roster since they'd eat an additional $18M in dead cap beyond his cap hit already.  That effectively puts his 2024 season as a push with $27M in dead cap.  You can either pay him $28M to play or you can have $27M in dead cap for him to not play.  I think that Y1 cap hit needs to come up and that Y4 cap hit needs to come down.

Yeah I looked at that but I don’t see how we take on much more than 12-15m in year 1 given our cap situation 

I was more looking in terms of cash paid per year (48m in year 1, 57m in first 2 years, 75m in 3 years)

 

[OneTwoSixFive]

9 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Yeah, I'm sure it's been tough for Rodgers to get by on the paltry salary he's made in his NFL career. 

The answer is NO, he hasn't and based on the 50 million a year he's not taking less for Adams or any of his other teammates. 

Trade his *** and move on. 

Then I posted:
I never begrudged a player trying to get the best salary he can (though I was close to it with the Dak Prescott holdout and his current contract).

Fans usually want high paid guys to take less money, but why should they take less than market value ? 

Sure it is a great deal of money, but that is because the number of people available who can do what he does, is almost nil.

Then....

8 hours ago, Old Guy said:

I think you miss the point entirely. Rodgers knows we have cap issues. Rodgers has said, 'it won't be about the money!' "Money won't be the issue!" 

That was complete bull**** if this report is true. 

Your first post was clearly a knock on Rodgers previous and current salary...........and when I replied with a justification for that salary, you then think I've missed your point ?

Despite what you said in your second post, Rodgers quote saying "money won't be the issue" is very likely true, given that the Packers were willing to make him the highest paid player. It is more down to who else will still be on the team and whether he wants a change. So perhaps it is you that not only missed the point, but forget exactly what you had said, in your earlier post.

You are probably aware that I wanted the Packers to trade Rodgers, not because I disliked him, but because of the cap implications. However, there is no ill-will involved on my part, just a business decision.

[coachbuns]

2 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Then I posted:
I never begrudged a player trying to get the best salary he can (though I was close to it with the Dak Prescott holdout and his current contract).

Fans usually want high paid guys to take less money, but why should they take less than market value ? 

Sure it is a great deal of money, but that is because the number of people available who can do what he does, is almost nil.

Then....

Your first post was clearly a knock on Rodgers previous and current salary...........and when I replied with a justification for that salary, you then think I've missed your point ?

Despite what you said in your second post, Rodgers quote saying "money won't be the issue" is very likely true, given that the Packers were willing to make him the highest paid player. It is more down to who else will still be on the team and whether he wants a change. So perhaps it is you that not only missed the point, but forget exactly what you had said, in your earlier post.

You are probably aware that I wanted the Packers to trade Rodgers, not because I disliked him, but because of the cap implications. However, there is no ill-will involved on my part, just a business decision.

It's been apparent that Rodgers is about the money .. 50 million a year certainly confirms that.   If he wants more players around him and who will be on the team - take a little less money to insure that happens!!  It is now getting frickin ridiculous with what Rodgers says but in reality does.