Packerraymond Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, incognito_man said: Ok? So? As a GM you get a 50% say in this. The player gets the other 50%. If Aaron asks for 15-20% of the cap I tell him that he's playing 2 years on the current deal he has, and 2 on a tag. After that he's free to negotiate any deal he'd like with any team he'd like. I might eventually give way at 15% but that's it. Any non QB player and it's a non starter, bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 NFL player performance is some version of a bell curve, but their pay isn't synchronized with that curve. The salary cap curve looks completely different than the performance curve for an individual player. The salary cap typically only goes up. So the players who signed a 5 year deal would have to agree to a declining percentage in the later years of the deal. Not sure that solves anything. A bell curve contract tied to the salary cap dollars ? Players are underpaid in the beginning of their careers and then overpaid at the end, which is why so many of them get cut like Jordy The NFL has instituted the Performance Bonuses for the guys on their rookie deals - that gives them a nice bump before they hit their 2nd contract and helps that end of the bell curve. Its the other end of the curve that is most contentious and difficult for the players/agents to accept Tying everything to the cap would change the entire system and its hard to have players on the same team being compensated on different pay systems. Which suggests a complete overhaul as part of the CBA negotiations and then you'd need both sides to agree to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: NFL player performance is some version of a bell curve, but their pay isn't synchronized with that curve. The salary cap curve looks completely different than the performance curve for an individual player. The salary cap typically only goes up. So the players who signed a 5 year deal would have to agree to a declining percentage in the later years of the deal. Not sure that solves anything. A bell curve contract tied to the salary cap dollars ? Players are underpaid in the beginning of their careers and then overpaid at the end, which is why so many of them get cut like Jordy The NFL has instituted the Performance Bonuses for the guys on their rookie deals - that gives them a nice bump before they hit their 2nd contract and helps that end of the bell curve. Its the other end of the curve that is most contentious and difficult for the players/agents to accept Tying everything to the cap would change the entire system and its hard to have players on the same team being compensated on different pay systems. Which suggests a complete overhaul as part of the CBA negotiations and then you'd need both sides to agree to it. Exactly, the only way an NFL franchise would agree to a deal like this is if the percentages declined over the length of the deal, or if the guaranteed money was a flat number not tied to a percentage and thus non-increasing with the cap and easy to get out from under. What difference is that to the current system the players have? Not much. The NBAs cap might be forced to go down or stay the same from all the crap contracts thrown around by the new TV deals. The MLB just had a horrid showing in FA because owners are sick of the guaranteed money players get at the end of contracts and are heading for a strike. The reason the NFL always has such a healthy increase on the salary cap is that the structure of deals has always allowed for teams to get in and out of contracts painlessly if they structure them right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malak1 Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 Boy, oh boy. Packer fans under the age of 30 are in for a rude awakening when Rodgers retires and they find out that HOF QBs don’t grow on trees. Just sit back and enjoy the ride while he’s still almost the best in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, malak1 said: Boy, oh boy. Packer fans under the age of 30 are in for a rude awakening when Rodgers retires and they find out that HOF QBs don’t grow on trees. Just sit back and enjoy the ride while he’s still almost the best in the league. There's a certain amount you can afford to pay a player before you're a team just hoping one guy can work some magic and win it all. No one thinks Rodgers type QBs grow on trees, but we can see that there's really no point to paying any one player that much. Also very few of us are actually worried about this, as has been said in this thread and agent the caliber of Rodgers contract isnt going to start off negotiating a market value deal. They'll work their way toward that. Rodgers should of been the first fully guaranteed player but the Vikings chose to take an above average QB and make him one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 7 hours ago, Joe said: I have to shoot this argument down. First, we were on the road in Seattle against one of the best defenses of all time. If it isn't for our repeated liability on ST's, we go to the Super Bowl and win. Against Chicago, we had no running game and the condition of the field was quite poor which usually helps the running game; something we didn't have that year. Rodgers' elusiveness was taken away due to the conditions of the field so he couldn't extend plays. Rodgers has been able to carry this team because we've been playing on the road in domes, which significantly helps the offense. That's why we've been in a ton of shootouts. Rodgers also was practically playing on one leg with that badly injured calf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 1 hour ago, Packerraymond said: There's a certain amount you can afford to pay a player before you're a team just hoping one guy can work some magic and win it all. No one thinks Rodgers type QBs grow on trees, but we can see that there's really no point to paying any one player that much. Also very few of us are actually worried about this, as has been said in this thread and agent the caliber of Rodgers contract isnt going to start off negotiating a market value deal. They'll work their way toward that. Rodgers should of been the first fully guaranteed player but the Vikings chose to take an above average QB and make him one. Joe may be targeting his post towards those here who are advocating trading Rodgers to bolster our defense. These posters feel we can win a SB with dynamite defense and a Dilfer-type QB. If all you need is a great D to win championships why did MN with their great defense feel the need to pay Kirk Cousins what they just did?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 2 hours ago, Shanedorf said: NFL player performance is some version of a bell curve, but their pay isn't synchronized with that curve. The salary cap curve looks completely different than the performance curve for an individual player. The salary cap typically only goes up. So the players who signed a 5 year deal would have to agree to a declining percentage in the later years of the deal. Not sure that solves anything. A bell curve contract tied to the salary cap dollars ? Players are underpaid in the beginning of their careers and then overpaid at the end, which is why so many of them get cut like Jordy The NFL has instituted the Performance Bonuses for the guys on their rookie deals - that gives them a nice bump before they hit their 2nd contract and helps that end of the bell curve. Its the other end of the curve that is most contentious and difficult for the players/agents to accept Tying everything to the cap would change the entire system and its hard to have players on the same team being compensated on different pay systems. Which suggests a complete overhaul as part of the CBA negotiations and then you'd need both sides to agree to it. Yep all the same strategy can be applied. It doesn't have to just be one solid percent for the entirety of a contract Just replace absolute numbers #s with %s. Really, that's it. Just makes more sense IMO. Then nobody has to try and forecast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kepler Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 18 minutes ago, Pugger said: If all you need is a great D to win championships why did MN with their great defense feel the need to pay Kirk Cousins what they just did?? I mean one could reply to that with, "if all you need is a great QB then why does GB have only one super bowl with Rodgers?" Just like there was more than one reason that MN didn't win a championship with a great defense, I think you'd probably argue that GB not winning more championships with Rodgers doesn't solely fall on his shoulders. I get it. I just feel that a football team is more than person, and I think that's proven year after year, especially in GB. That's really my whole point. He's already hamstrung FA this year, to a point. I don't want to see Rodgers contract become a hindrance to GB being able to field a competitive team for the rest of his time here. We see players take less all the time for a chance to win championships. They don't have to that's for sure, but even Suh just took less to play for what looks to be a stellar 2019 defense for the rams. Let that sink in for a minute. Ndamakong Suh took less than market value, while it appears that Rodgers is shooting for more money than his future great grandkids could spend. I just think it isn't the best course of action for this team to take. If the deal gets signed and it works out that Gute can still make the moves he wants, then I'll gladly admit to being worried about nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 There are some real risks to the organization here guys. Don't think anyone wants to trade Aaron and build a defense. It's can we keep Aaron and field a competitive team around him with a new massive contract? Also the guy is not superman. What if the Packers do as some suggest and give him an enormous contract fully guaranteed and then he suffers a career ending injury? OK where are we now? Screwed that's where we'd be. Whatever the Packers do they need to protect the franchise first and foremost. The Cousins deal was sheer insanity. He goes down and the Vikings will go from the Penthouse to the Doghouse real quick. Personally I think it's a bad idea. Murphy is confident something can be worked out and I hope that is the case. Just as long as the Packers are smart about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 NFL performance isn't a bell-curve. Total football player performance ranging from grade school to the NFL is a bell-curve. The NFL is the very very extreme right end of the bell-curve. There aren't more QBs in the average (NFL) tier than on the "crap" (NFL) tier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketchup Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 31 minutes ago, Scoremore said: There are some real risks to the organization here guys. Don't think anyone wants to trade Aaron and build a defense. It's can we keep Aaron and field a competitive team around him with a new massive contract? Also the guy is not superman. What if the Packers do as some suggest and give him an enormous contract fully guaranteed and then he suffers a career ending injury? OK where are we now? Screwed that's where we'd be. Whatever the Packers do they need to protect the franchise first and foremost. The Cousins deal was sheer insanity. He goes down and the Vikings will go from the Penthouse to the Doghouse real quick. Personally I think it's a bad idea. Murphy is confident something can be worked out and I hope that is the case. Just as long as the Packers are smart about it. The ole “the guy might get hurt” argument. Any player can go down to a career ending injury, that doesn’t mean you don’t pay the guy what he’s worth. Now, if you want to argue one player simply isn’t worth that much, that’s fine and that’s obviously a common opinion here, but let’s not go down the rabbit hole of what if’s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 Sure pay him what he's worth fine but don't guarantee a contract for years into the future. You are talking about making him the highest paid player in the league here. If we go ahead and do this and he goes down we are screwed. Do you want to suffer through years of cap hell? It would be pretty hard to be competitive with a 30 million cap hit going out for years into the future. Such a scenario would set the Packers back for years. Do you disagree or is it you are willing to risk the franchise on one player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 It's a GM's job to deal with what if's. You have to be smart about it. Things don't always work out the way you want them to. Evaluate the worst case and if you can live with it then proceed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 24 minutes ago, Scoremore said: There are some real risks to the organization here guys. Don't think anyone wants to trade Aaron and build a defense. It's can we keep Aaron and field a competitive team around him with a new massive contract? Also the guy is not superman. What if the Packers do as some suggest and give him an enormous contract fully guaranteed and then he suffers a career ending injury? OK where are we now? Screwed that's where we'd be. Whatever the Packers do they need to protect the franchise first and foremost. The Cousins deal was sheer insanity. He goes down and the Vikings will go from the Penthouse to the Doghouse real quick. Personally I think it's a bad idea. Murphy is confident something can be worked out and I hope that is the case. Just as long as the Packers are smart about it. Whether it's fully guaranteed and tied to the cap or only mostly guaranteed and just a very high number, we're screwed if Rodgers suffers a career ending injury. Further to the point, this team is screwed for a few years if Rodgers suffers a long term injury even if Rodgers is playing on a volunteer basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.